Sure thing, honeybunches of nuts! You have the choice not to shake hands.
And if gloves protect you from the handrape, my little sweetling of sociopathy, you can shake hands with gloves on so that the bad man can’t touch you in your special place. You know. Your thumb.
Anyway, I’ll play devil’s advocate. All else being equal, a guy who insists on touching a woman, or tries to shame her into it (“it’s just a handshake, what’s your problem?”) is probably more likely to be a rapist or abuser. And yes, it is forced, on a societal level. It’s forced on everyone, really. Shaking hands sucks, but it’s one of those things you have to put up with. To avoid it you’d either have to turn into a social freak who sticks out like a sore thumb and be the subject of harsh judgment, or be a hermit.
ZPG: Instead of stabbing them, why don’t you one up them by offering your hand to them? Now they’re the whore! Oh wait, that doesn’t work for guys I guess. Slut/stud split. I guess fantasizing about slicing into their inards with a blade is better… :o
So what if she chooses to accept someone’s handshake, and doesn’t feel violated at all?
Then she’s either a whore, or too naive to know how badly she’s been treated. Duh.
Ahh but that’s not the subject of the thread’s position. Her position is that only whores usually willingly accept a handshake, and such gems as illegitimate children are worthless vampires stealing money from their baby daddy and making the world a worse place.
Edit: oh and adoptive parents are probably baby snatchers.
[interjection]
On the bright side, she won’t be reproducing …
[/interjection]
Carry on
Oh, I wouldn’t count on that. In case you haven’t noticed, consistency isn’t really something she concerns herself with.
What a load of idiassery.
Turn yourself in.
So I gotta ask. If I shake my sister’s hand, is that incest? Is teaching my dog to shake her paw bestiality? Need answer fast!
Yes, rly. Of course I know what *consciousness *raising is, the point was that she used the term *conscious *raising - it sounds like an activity where you go around waking other people up.
Who FORCE the poor orphans to lie and call them mom and dad!
But at least the orphans owe their kidneys to nobody! What I wouldn’t give to have a taste of your sweet freedom!
Hmm…not sure that’s good enough. Let me ask the expert and I’ll get back to you on the purchase.
Zealot, what says you, hawt or not?
:eek:
Talk about some hardcore handshaking…damn! I’ll be up all night just thinking about it.
I’m shaking my own hand like a mutha right now…
Aw, man - I high-fived my own brother just the other day! And he started it, that sneaky would-be rapist!
You are an idiot. That is clearly not what I said.
I’m sorry, I didn’t see bombings?
Uh, yeah, she does come off pretty nutty there… :eek:
As much as I hate interacting with you, I feel compelled to point out that, at least as you have quoted it, that it appears that ZPG Zealot means this Guardian person expects no reward or anything different than raising a blood relation. Or she could also mean that in her family blood relations have a duty to support their parents or something, yet if one is a Guardian you would never expect the kids you raised to do so.
I bet you enjoyed it too!
Actually, it pretty clearly was. It’s nice to see you finally admit it.
Her whole argument is based on the idea that adoptive parents *force *their children to call them Mom and Dad. That their love is conditional on the child using those terms. Then she says that an adoptive parents unconditional love will turn the child into a sociopath. So which is it that adoptive parents have - conditional or unconditional love? It doesn’t matter, they’re terrible people one way or the other in ZPG’s mind.
If the guardian is raising the child with no expectation of anything in return (not even the much-coveted childs kidney owed to natural parents), that is unconditional, is it not? So aren’t they raising a little sociopath too?
You are any idiot too, which is why I don’t like interacting with you. Go back and read it with an unbiased eye and remember, the person that I said wasn’t making any sense wasn’t me. Ergo, I am not the one that I termed batshit crazy. Or is your problem you don’t know words like “ergo”?
As I said, my comment was based on what you quoted. If she has actually said that adoptive parents routinely (I’m sure there are some out there that do so) force their kids to call them Mom and Dad, then yes she is a nutter, at least on that subject. And if she has actually put forth the contradiction you put forth up there, then she has some logic problems. OTOH, you have a history of not understanding posts…
I have a feeling she thinks unconditional love means the children are not raised with boundaries, rules or consequences.
It doesn’t and never has. I grew up in the south as did all of my family. It’s just so stupid I chose not to debate it with her. As was said up-thread, she’s over played her hand at this point.
DianaG, you have made me laugh out loud several times this thread. Thank you.