This weeks 'Mutt of the Week'.

[aka]

jane2 said:

ok i can see what Benty means although i dont agree

Beej writes and explains in detail and shows a more feminine side - ie he cares

i might be digging myself a hole here

beej where are you mate ?

I dunno Jane. Joseph, RickZ, RFisher also write and explain in detail. No one has accused them of writing like women. I can understand someone saying you think like a woman but WRITE like a woman, that I don't get.

[Jane]

i am not the best person to explain i give up

Beej get your butt here and post so i can anaylise something ;D

[josephdphillips]

aka said:

No need to capitalize your denial, Jane. I know those are Benty's words. I read Beej's posts closely and carefully as he is a poster worth reading closely and carefully. I don't think he writes like a woman because I don't know what a woman writes like.

I agree, AKA. Beej raises some good points. I disagree with a lot of what he says, but he expresses himself well, which is a lot better than I can say for Benty.

[snowy111]

aka said:

jane2 said:

ok i can see what Benty means although i dont agree

Beej writes and explains in detail and shows a more feminine side - ie he cares

i might be digging myself a hole here

beej where are you mate ?

I dunno Jane. Joseph, RickZ, RFisher also write and explain in detail. No one has accused them of writing like women. I can understand someone saying you think like a woman but WRITE like a woman, that I don't get.

This might be because Joseph, RickZ, and RFisher believe in the dp and we think of men a protecting society and not guilty criminals.
But personaly I think Beej does a pretty good job although I don't agree with him quite often. He does try to explain what he believes in.

[Benty Pro Dp]

I agree, AKA. Beej raises some good points. I disagree with a lot of what he says, but he expresses himself well, which is a lot better than I can say for Benty.

Gee Joe, didn't know this board was all about syntax and prose...but more about telling one's feelings....despite being kicked out of the 7th grade as Lady Beej puts it...perhaps I should send you all of my posts for a critique before I put them on here...whatcha tink?

[snowy111]

snowy111 said:

aka said:

I dunno Jane. Joseph, RickZ, RFisher also write and explain in detail. No one has accused them of writing like women. I can understand someone saying you think like a woman but WRITE like a woman, that I don't get.

This might be because Joseph, RickZ, and RFisher believe in the dp and we think of men a protecting society and not guilty criminals.
But personaly I think Beej does a pretty good job although I don't agree with him quite often. He does try to explain what he believes in.

I've thought of a better way of putting this. We tend to think of men as protecting society from the guilty by bringing them to justice. We don't think of men as protecting the guilty from justice required from society.

[aka]

snowy111 said:

snowy111 said:

This might be because Joseph, RickZ, and RFisher believe in the dp and we think of men a protecting society and not guilty criminals.
But personaly I think Beej does a pretty good job although I don't agree with him quite often. He does try to explain what he believes in.

I've thought of a better way of putting this. We tend to think of men as protecting society from the guilty by bringing them to justice. We don't think of men as protecting the guilty from justice required from society.

I don't know Snowy. Saying that Beej writes like a woman is then implying that women protect the guilty from justice. I am sure many of the female pros would object to such a characterization. One can further extrapolate from that and say that pros are manly and antis girlie. Why do we have to think of people's positions on the death penalty in such gendered terms?

[snowy111]

aka said:

snowy111 said:

I've thought of a better way of putting this. We tend to think of men as protecting society from the guilty by bringing them to justice. We don't think of men as protecting the guilty from justice required from society.

I don't know Snowy. Saying that Beej writes like a woman is then implying that women protect the guilty from justice. I am sure many of the female pros would object to such a characterization. One can further extrapolate from that and say that pros are manly and antis girlie. Why do we have to think of people's positions on the death penalty in such gendered terms?

Well I for one have never said Beej writes like a woman.
I do understand what you mean. I don't think girls beng anti. Not when you think of a mother protecting her young from harm.
But in the past we have thought of men fighting the wars and hunting the wild animals for food. I guess because men are more agressive by nature.
But you are right we shouldn't think of someone's stance on the dp as a gendered term.

[blakely]

mamabear said:

spearmintgal said:

In Rockford, Ill. residents have to band together every year to keep another pedophile butcher in prison.
www.wifr.com/home/headlines/1166787.html
We can prevent these recurring nightmares with the DP as a one time solution.
In Loving Memory of Sara West and Joey Didier!

But until we are able to get the DP used in all these horrendous cases, all we can do is protest their eventual release. I am all for these murdering mutts being sent to their death, but if they aren't then they at the very least should NOT BE RELEASED back into the streets!!!

How about lobbying for Sexually Violent Predator laws such as they have in California? That way, they can be civilly committed after their release from prison b/c they continue to be a danger to the public.

[blakely]

liam said:

there are MVS organizations that are Anti-Death Penalty. I would join one of them before I killed the killer. I'm sure they could lead me to the help I would need.

But unlike you and your organization(s), they do not routinely lie and say they are innocent, minimize the facts, or distort the law.

[blakely]

liam said:

Well, Eminey, if you're labeling me as naive, it shows how little you know me.

Right, eminey, she's not naive, she's a liar.

[Deleted]

liam said:

mamabear said:

Oh gee!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does that mean YOU write to scumbags and ask them a simple question.....like: Why don't you do the right thing and drop your appeals?

Thanks suzzie..................thats much appreciated!

Of course I write to inmates. I can help them a whole lot better on my end if I know what's going on inside.

Of course the first inmate I ever wrote was my husband , however, he's at home now, so no more "contact visits" sitting across the table from one another.

My mother-in-law wrote him while he was in prison also. Do you refer to her as a "scumpal" also?

hugggz,
Suzanne

Personally Suzanne, I don't consider ANY family member that writes a fellow family member a scumpal in prison or out. However, in my humble opinion writing to prisoners that are NOT a family member is just plain wrong. Those that write prisoners to give them friendship and comfort, and a sense of 'the outside world' is somewhat hindering the prison 'experience'. They are there to be kept off the streets, and also to be punished for a crime. Not to socialize, and place adds for mail-order brides, or to drag unsuspecting women into their webs of deceit, or beg honest working people for their money. They should NOT have websites, and those websites are MOST DEFINIATELY a slap in the face to ANY MVS!!!!!

Now all that is just my opinion, but I take 'coddling a killer' very personal.

[spur]

Personally Suzanne, I don't consider ANY family member that writes a fellow family member a scumpal in prison or out. However, in my humble opinion writing to prisoners that are NOT a family member is just plain wrong. Those that write prisoners to give them friendship and comfort, and a sense of 'the outside world' is somewhat hindering the prison 'experience'. They are there to be kept off the streets, and also to be punished for a crime. Not to socialize, and place adds for mail-order brides, or to drag unsuspecting women into their webs of deceit, or beg honest working people for their money. They should NOT have websites, and those websites are MOST DEFINIATELY a slap in the face to ANY MVS!!!!!

Now all that is just my opinion, but I take 'coddling a killer' very personal.

I am so biting my tongue here but Mammabear you right on the money with this post....there is a ton of wisdom in here....especially with the "However, in my humble opinion writing to prisoners that are NOT a family member is just plain wrong." Statement.

[Deleted]

aka said:

One can further extrapolate from that and say that pros are manly and antis girlie. Why do we have to think of people's positions on the death penalty in such gendered terms?

In very simple terms, I too kinda think of them with personalities somewhat like that.
Except I word it a tiny bit different:
Pro's - TOUGH
Anti's - SISSY'S

[josephdphillips]

mamabear said:

Personally Suzanne, I don't consider ANY family member that writes a fellow family member a scumpal in prison or out. However, in my humble opinion writing to prisoners that are NOT a family member is just plain wrong. Those that write prisoners to give them friendship and comfort, and a sense of 'the outside world' is somewhat hindering the prison 'experience'. They are there to be kept off the streets, and also to be punished for a crime. Not to socialize, and place adds for mail-order brides, or to drag unsuspecting women into their webs of deceit, or beg honest working people for their money. They should NOT have websites, and those websites are MOST DEFINIATELY a slap in the face to ANY MVS!!!!! Now all that is just my opinion, but I take 'coddling a killer' very personal.

Ditto, although I do make an exception for those who write killers to get them to do the right thing, i.e. kill themselves or end their appeals.

[aka]

mamabear said:

aka said:

One can further extrapolate from that and say that pros are manly and antis girlie. Why do we have to think of people's positions on the death penalty in such gendered terms?

In very simple terms, I too kinda think of them with personalities somewhat like that.
Except I word it a tiny bit different:
Pro's - TOUGH
Anti's - SISSY'S

To that I would say that both the anti and the pro sides are too complex to be inserted into these tidy boxes that are pasted with nice little labels like tough/manly and girlie/sissy. Human thinking, especially on an issue as complex as the DP, is not so easy to categorize.

In any case for me, "sissyness" is not necessarily a bad thing. I am sure you would call Gandhi a sissy--he was an anti and a life-long believer in non-violence--and perhaps he was a wuss according to the terms of your definition. Yet, he brought down the British empire and created a nation through simple acts of non-violent resistance. That takes extraordinary courage, IMO.

[blakely]

Ghandi liked to sleep with naked little girls. Usually, two at a time.

[Deleted]

amy said:

What started as a great thread with a great idea has really descended into a terribly uncivil place!

It's still a great idea.

Sometimes some threads get a bit heated, but that doesn't change the quality of the thread. We all have opinions, and some just express theirs in a different way.

Honestly, Benty is not a bad guy at all. He's a 'fatally wounded Grandpa'. You can't fault a guy for carrying his feelings so close to his heart. I sympathize with Benty, because I KNOW the deep deep hurt that we are left with. So, I get bitter and angry quite often too. More often than not, it's our way of coping with life after such a mortal blow.

[Deleted]

blakely said:

Ghandi liked to sleep with naked little girls. Usually, two at a time.

Didn't he also wear dresses? ;D

[aka]

blakely said:

Ghandi liked to sleep with naked little girls. Usually, two at a time.

Yes. That is true. From what I know of this though--and I have read up on Gandhi fairly extensively--they were all of legal age. Also, he didn't sleep with them in a sexual sense. He was trying to test his moral resolve by laying down with nubile women. It is still very creepy and weird and I am certainly not going to defend Gandhi's unsavory side but that doesn't change the fact that he wrested independence for India through simple acts of non-violent defiance

[aka]

mamabear said:

blakely said:

Ghandi liked to sleep with naked little girls. Usually, two at a time.

Didn't he also wear dresses? ;D

Ha ha funny joke. He wore a loin cloth. People in other parts of the world dress differently you know. Shows that I made my point though if you can only respond by mocking Gandhi's clothes.

[blakely]

I remember specifically him bragging that they were 12 years old. And yes, he said it was to test himself. Whether 12 is legal age or not, I don't know, nor do I care, since as you put it, it's still very creepy and weird.

[blakely]

He spun his own cloth. That makes him "girlie."

[Deleted]

aka said:

Also, he didn't sleep with them in a sexual sense.

So he slept with them sort of in a Michael Jackson way??? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

(he says he doesn't sleep with little boys in a sexual way either...)

[spur]

Also, he didn't sleep with them in a sexual sense. He was trying to test his moral resolve by laying down with nubile women

That was such a noble sacrifice of him to do such a great thing for these women.

David Koresh was another mighty man of...ah....a God, not God.

[spur]

Ditto, although I do make an exception for those who write killers to get them to do the right thing, i.e. kill themselves or end their appeals.

Joseph, I need to send you a invoice for my laundry....I just $hit myself.......thats funny right there...I don't care who ya are! Larry

[Deleted]

spur said:

Also, he didn't sleep with them in a sexual sense. He was trying to test his moral resolve by laying down with nubile women

That was such a noble sacrifice of him to do such a great thing for these women.

David Koresh was another mighty man of...ah....a God, not God.

Yea, and if I remember right Koresh slept with many--if not ALL--of his female 'congregation'.

Much like that well known self-proclaimed mesiah - Charlie Manson

[aka]

blakely said:

I remember specifically him bragging that they were 12 years old. And yes, he said it was to test himself. Whether 12 is legal age or not, I don't know, nor do I care, since as you put it, it's still very creepy and weird.

I honestly don't remember him bragging about the age of the girls. I think the legal age was 16. Regardless, it must have been very traumatic for the girls involved. One of the girls even wrote about her experiences "sleeping" with the Mahatma. Gandhi has always been my political hero but this is one aspect of his personality that boggles my mind. Oh, also his obsession with bowel movement.

[blakely]

mamabear said:

aka said:

Also, he didn't sleep with them in a sexual sense.

So he slept with them sort of in a Michael Jackson way??? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

(he says he doesn't sleep with little boys in a sexual way either...)

Who the heck knows? It's been pretty much swept under the historical rug. Aka argues that it should not distract from what his ideas accomplished. But, I would also argue the opposite: the fact that he did good, should not mean we pretend this other side did not exist.

Since it is rarely talked about and I doubt anyone asked the little girls if he passed his own test, I don't know. But, now that he is long dead, I think historians should be more open about this.

[aka]

blakely said:

He spun his own cloth. That makes him "girlie."

Well that makes almost all of British India girlie. It was a powerful way of hitting the Empire where it hurts the most--economically! Gandhi got an entire nation rejecting British Cotton and spinning their own cloth. Girlie he might have been but his effectiveness as a leader cannot be denied.