Posts by Emma Hart
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Just Like Unicorns, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Just google it … go on … I dare you
You may wish to take a moment to imagine how googling sources for this article went.
-
Up Front: Just Like Unicorns, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Part of the issue there is about being certain any child is in fact the progeny of the husband – hence the importance of virgin bride.
Absolutely. If we'd stuck with matrilinear inheritance, there'd be no need for this bollocks. It's so much easier to know who someone's mother is.
-
Up Front: Just Like Unicorns, in reply to Tom Beard,
"If you and your partner are wondering whether you're having sex, you probably are."
I really like Scarleteen's 'something you do to express your sexuality'. It comfortably accommodates why some kinksters consider BDSM to be sex, and others don't. BDSM practice that includes no conventional sexual contact whatsoever is still sex for me, because I consider it an expression of my sexuality. In spades. Other people don't consider that for them, BDSM is sexuality. So there are couples who consider themselves monogamous but still have play partners, for instance, because for them, that's not sex.
-
Up Front: Just Like Unicorns, in reply to Ianmac,
Interesting in the biblical sense. The Church insists on the “Virgin Mary.” A whole society is built around this idea. Of course the Hebrew meaning of virgin was just to mean “a good woman.”
Yeah, I think it’s one of those things it’s really important to keep pointing out: “virgin” didn’t mean what it does now. (And, y’know, also, Bible, not written in English. “Witch” is not a word in Hebrew.)
I think I’d add though, given that each person responds differently, that any time you try something new / with a new partner, you are exploring what is, for you (individually or mutually), virgin territory. So it’s a continuing process.
Yeah, isn’t it great? At my age, I’m still finding out stuff about what my body likes. It’s a continual learning process.
-
Yeah, these are thoughts that have recently started running through my family's minds as well. We didn't even think about leaving in the immediate aftermath of the quakes. But now... There's what Stephen describes as "ambient despair" (I think): this utter low-level but absolutely constant sense of stagnation and decline that's an effort to push away. Just this morning, we've been told our leaking roof is actually undetected earthquake damage, and I have no hope at all that it'll be covered by insurance. Maybe we should actually just walk away.
Instead, we are valiantly buying raised beds for our sodden garden and just soldiering on.
-
Hard News: Jones: The contender leaves, in reply to ,
It is a given that any sort of violence against women and children (or other people) is unacceptable within our community’s today.
No, it’s not. Theoretically, sure, but when the guy is someone you know, someone inside your community? The first thing many people will do – “even” white middle-class well-educated people – is make excuses for him. Stress. Drink. Things she did.
-
Southerly: How I Became a Grumpy Old…, in reply to BenWilson,
I thought he invented it to give it to Woman, in order to make Child :-)
Beer almost certainly invented by women.
-
Hard News: Gower Speaks, in reply to Bart Janssen,
But I still think the MSM could take a punt and start representing the poll data in a manner more closely linked to reality.
There is one thing they could, and should, be doing which is incredibly simple: include the undecided/don't know/wouldn't say vote. Making it disappear isn't "dealing with what's there". One of the most interesting things about that last poll, surely, was the rise in the undecided vote. These are the people who will, very probably, decide the election. If the undecided vote is, say, twice the difference between the 'left' and 'right' coalition blocks, that's pretty damn important, AND it makes for an interesting story.
I do not understand why it isn't done.
-
Up Front: The Kids are All Right, in reply to BenWilson,
How about their desire for privacy?
I sort of thought myself into a hole into a hole contemplating this question, because I think there are so many other factors that play into an individual's desire for privacy. How private you want to be is a factor of how hard you have to work to keep yourself safe.
So if you need a more locked-down environment for some aspects of your life, that's always available. I can have open/unlocked accounts on both Facebook and Twitter, and still have Fetlife. For safety reasons, that area of my life needs to not be open to every passing weirdo.
There is a mental exercise I wish social media platform designers would carry out, and it's this. "I am a woman who has just left an abusive relationship. I wish to interact with my friends, and still be safe." Google+ failed that spectacularly. Now it's just that place where Eastern European men I've never met add me to Circles and I can't do shit about it.
So, what is it that people are going to find out about you? That you got wasted before your exams and you weren't "sick" after all? Or that you're queer, or kinky? Where you live so they can stalk you? That you had an abortion, or attempted suicide? Even for teens, the risk factor varies so much.
-
Up Front: The Kids are All Right, in reply to Jolisa,
Even though he’s been cornered on the marriage equality question, carbon tax, and asylum-seekers, Abbott is so keen to ingratiate himself with these kids that he bends his rules:
The jaw-dropping moment for me was when, after the marriage equality question, Abbott said, "Let's have a guy question."
He actually said that. With those words and everything. Let's have a guy question.
if LJ thinks more women should be in power she should join the Liberal Party and “work her way up”
Actually proving her point, as this is demonstrably not possible for a woman in the Liberal Party.