LawTalkers - Fashion Board--Penske . . . forever!

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)

- The Fashionable (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)

- - Fashion Board--Penske . . . forever! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=742)

Quote:

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
This is true. For some reason I had completely taken credit for it in my head, and now I remember our conversation. Damn.

I think it was my internet girlfriend who first got me onto gofugyourself.

Who is ncs's internet girlfriend? I'm confused. Or just not remembering names right again.

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Who is ncs's internet girlfriend? I'm confused. Or just not remembering names right again.

Uh... duh.

ncs + gwink = true internet-girlfriend love

This is elementary, my dear fringey. Elementary. How do you not know this? Are you retarded?

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
Uh... duh.

ncs + gwink = true internet-girlfriend love

This is elementary, my dear fringey. Elementary. How do you not know this? Are you retarded?

And bn'b + dtb = Laverne and Shirley

(sigh)

Quote:

Originally posted by bold_n_brazen
And bn'b + dtb = Laverne and Shirley

(sigh)

I thought we were Thelma and Louise. But not so sure who is which.

Though I'm pretty sure who I am in the L&S scenario.

I CAN'T HELP IT!

(sigh, indeed)

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
Uh... duh.

ncs + gwink = true internet-girlfriend love

This is elementary, my dear fringey. Elementary. How do you not know this? Are you retarded?

I'm retarded. Yes.

So gwink was not talking about you? OK.

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Why? You cited the definition. It relates to people who have diagnosable development disorders. Not psychological disorders, which are somewhat subjective, but actual development disorders which are characterised by tangible and/or empirical markers. Notwithstanding any other difference of opinion between us and any other deragatory term you want to use to describe me, I think you know that I don't have the empirical markers which would amount to a categorisation of "mentally retarded". I offered the example of one person, who had a developmentally delayed child who relayed her perception of the word's offensiveness to parents of and children who are afflicted with such reality. My understanding, although not scientfiically tested by me, that this is a common sensitivity amongst parents of developmentally delayed children, educators involved in that field and others who have an interest in being sensitive to others in their community. I said and maintain, that I stopped using the word, in any context (except our conversation here), not because the woman/parent inquestion is sitting on my shoulder monitoring me, but because I realised after she pointed it out to me that perpetuating the common/slang use of the word as a casual pejorative is insulting to those people actually affected by the reality of being developmentally delayed.

Why you want to argue that its still a good word to use or maybe people aren't sensitive I don't know. Maybe someday you wil have a developmentally delayed kid and someone will use the word to that child and you will feel differently. but then again that will be anecotal and not really representative of anything broad based or generally applicable.

There is a real difference, as I see it, between calling someone who actually has developmental problems, "retarded" and calling you the same. I would not do the former, but it seems like the word (which is descriptive of a condition) when applied to someone who has no such problems is not or should not be offensive. Again, would the person who called you on it be offended if you made a joke of "slow," "mentally handicapped," "differently-abled of the brain," etc? Is it never okay to accuse someone who clearly has no mental problems of having them? If so, I disagree.

And you can have the last word because this a mentally handicapped person's conversation.

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If I got tagged with the categorisations irl I might be worried, but I am comfortable that while I may have arseholic thoughts from time to time, I am much beloved. Too much beloved in fact. I need less adoration but I people still flock to me. Like flies to shit.

If you had any balls and said the type of shit you say through socks or IM, irl, you'd getted treated like fly-covered shit. But we both know you would never unload your tripe irl for fear of being completely shunned.

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
My sentiment was no different than yours re: the subjectivity of what is worthy to post or not (eg: you don't care if I don't like yoiur sports posts, I don't care if you dont like my k posts). for every dissenter such as yourself, I have a comrade in socks, such as ppnyc.

Didn't you ask me not to bring her into this since she hasn't weighed in? Either way, you need to recount the dissenters and then rally your socks because you're way behind the "dissenters" right now.

TM

eta: My bad. I see ppnyc has weighed in in the expected manner. That's one.

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
There is a real difference, as I see it, between calling someone who actually has developmental problems, "retarded" and calling you the same. I would not do the former, but it seems like the word (which is descriptive of a condition) when applied to someone who has no such problems is not or should not be offensive. Again, would the person who called you on it be offended if you made a joke of "slow," "mentally handicapped," "differently-abled of the brain," etc? Is it never okay to accuse someone who clearly has no mental problems of having them? If so, I disagree.

And you can have the last word because this a mentally handicapped person's conversation.

If you had any balls and said the type of shit you say through socks or IM, irl, you'd getted treated like fly-covered shit. But we both know you would never unload your tripe irl for fear of being completely shunned.

Didn't you ask me not to bring her into this since she hasn't weighed in? Either way, you need to recount the dissenters and then rally your socks because you're way behind the "dissenters" right now.

TM

eta: My bad. I see ppnyc has weighed in in the expected manner. That's one.

We'll never get to 5k if you keep killing the board.

I'm quite pleased

In my hockey league, two games ago I was asked to play center instead of RW, because two of our usual centers were away. Last game, I was kept at center and one of those guys was moved to the wing. I think it's because I'm good at taking care of business in front of the net in the defensive zone. I don't brook for no guys standing around untouched on the doorstep. So even though I suck on the draws, I'm lining up in the middle.

I like playing center. Or centre.

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
We'll never get to 5k if you keep killing the board.

Is this a debate on the use of the word retarded?

Where's Flower when you need a ruling on the use of irony.

Riders of Lohan!

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Behold the side boobage:

http://207.44.176.74/~wwtdd/ul/1198-lohanboob.jpg

Her handlers are fantastic. She could so easily be the next Tara Reid. Yet for some reason, though she hasn't exhibited abilities much beyond Reid's, she seems an inherently higher end brand. A tribute to shrewd marketing.

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
With my current firm I am hardpressed to think of an instance where there was even a minimal right down, let alone a lack of collection, but to be safe I'll say at least 98% of hours I wrote down as billable have been collected. Is that low?

I had a 90% run a few years back, and that was derrty, derrty money.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

The blue jays just left the bases loaded in the top of the 1st.

For more updates as the evening goes on, stay tuned.

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Lists of people you have fucked. Not that you want to fuck, although that was one topic of this week's episode.

Seth Green was in the episode and every time he saw Eric he intimated that he had had sex with Eric's girlfriend, except Eric said that Seth Green wasn't on the "list." Turtle said "list?" and Eric said, in a pissy, holier-than-thou smug serially monogamous tone, "Yeah, the list. Couples make lists, Turtle." and I thought to myself "they do?"

Then Vince said "everyone leaves someone off the list, Eric," in a
"poor, naive Eric, believing what his hot, Hollywood-inside girlfriend said about her past" kind of tone. That was the only thing that struck me as true, if you accept the premise that couples make lists, Turtle. Hell, if I were to make a list I have a Seth Green or two that I would leave off, even if the only person ever to see the list were me.

Maybe in Hollywood couples make lists because there's so much gossip?

Why does Seth Green have a film career? He sucks... Paulie-Shore-sucks.

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Why does Seth Green have a film career? He sucks... Paulie-Shore-sucks.

Agreed. But did you pick up that little verbal trick from that godawful Yoplait yogurt commercial? "This is shoe-shopping good."