Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Jul 18 01:35:44 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / 9 months in 9 months out
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 04:28:13
My son is almost 9 months now, 3 trimester out :)

The first is colored by shock and a little bit of panic. It is also so new and they are so small and fragile, so I did not think, I just reacted. And many times asking the question, who is this guy? I mean my son was not a surprise, we had 9 months preparing, but then boom, one day there is a new person there that did not even exist.

The second is another shade of the same, scrambling to make the new set up fit together and asking yourself, WHY THE FUCK DID I DO THIS? LIFE WAS GOOD AND EASY!

The third is just love :) At this point he is more of a human than he ever was, he is starting to imitate you and surprising you every day. HE SAT UP ALL BY HIMSELF HONEY!!! DID YOU SEE THAT?!?

I loved him since day 1, but it really took 6-7 months to form that bond. Now I am torn between the joy of his laughter and the constant fear of something bad happening and losing him :,( don't watch too many ogrish videos of Chinese babies getting their heads flattened by trucks. Pro tip.

It was all very obvious right? Before you had kids, when people told you all the cliches, "Your life will not be the same" "the love for you children bla bla bla". We all nodded, it was self evident, of course. But the insights lie experiencing it those "self-evident" cliches.

Don't wait too long, all the cliches are worth it :)
Allahuakbar
Member
Wed May 16 04:49:21
Circumcised?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 05:20:00
Glad you brought it up. No. I stand by it, even though I will probably mever get over how ugly his penis looks, it is as nature intended.
obaminated
Member
Wed May 16 05:29:17
You should get that snipped. Beyond looking better, its much easier for hygiene.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 05:58:06
I have not found any convincing evidence one way or another.
Rugian
Member
Wed May 16 05:58:54
I love how a thread devoted to thoughts on parenthood immediately devolves into people asking whether the kid is getting his dick snipped.

That having been said, what the hell are you doing? Forget what nature intended, God intends for you to get that lil' fucker circumcised. Get it done already.
obaminated
Member
Wed May 16 06:34:10
We all have a weird relationship with each other. Its been over a decade of knowing each other, so we dont feel a need to be polite or patient, we are blunt and direct. Nim get cut your kids dick. Girls like it more and its what God demands.
jergul
large member
Wed May 16 06:39:03
USians
Man up and grow a foreskin.

"The rates vary widely by country, from 1% in Japan, to 2% in Spain and Sweden, to 58% in the United States, to more than 80% in Muslim-majority countries. Worldwide it is estimated that 25% to 33% of males are circumcised, by various sources"
Dukhat
Member
Wed May 16 06:52:02
When he blows himself up in a terrorist attack will it really matter?
Daemon
Member
Wed May 16 07:31:02
"its much easier for hygiene."

Bad deal:

http://www...easure-study-article-1.1264511
"Men circumcised either as children or adults report less intense sexual pleasure and orgasm than their uncircumcised counterparts, according to a new study from Belgium."

I have the theory that you Americans, Muslims and Jews are so violent because you can't have real orgasms and so you are sexually frustrated.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 08:19:15
As much as I like the way my penis looks (well it could have been larger, it can always be a bit larger, I have never had any complaints, that I know of... Really it is fine. But you know it COULD be bigger), I also get that this is all in my own head and the product of 36 years of intimate relationship. Me and my penis go way back, he has been there through thick and thin and never failed me. I wouldn't trade my penis for all the fore skin in China.

But my sons penis, is his own, to use and abuse as he sees fit, within reason. And also the law, that one is important.
hood
Member
Wed May 16 08:31:13
I regret entering this thread.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 08:41:31
I regret having created it, we will get over it..
TJ
Member
Wed May 16 09:42:34
BJ Urology International

lulz
obaminated
Member
Wed May 16 11:11:27
Dude, your son aint gonna wanna snip his dick when he is 18, even if he is 18 and wants to, he aint gonna do it. Just snip that shit and be done with it.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed May 16 11:12:39
"Just snip that shit and be done with it."

if it ain't broke,don't fix it.
Paramount
Member
Wed May 16 11:15:02
Allah wants you to mutilate your son’s penis. It is in his religion.
Nekran
Member
Wed May 16 14:11:16
Snipped dicks feel less pleasure because they have lost their protection and are constantly grating against fabric.

There are 0 advantages to a snipped dick if you have a minimum of hygiene.

"I have the theory that you Americans, Muslims and Jews are so violent because you can't have real orgasms and so you are sexually frustrated."

I never realised that the most violent groups of people in the world are the snipped dicks people. Makes a disturbing amount of sense...
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 14:35:14
America is about as violent as Norway. The violence is just more deadly in the USA, but the overall occurrence of violence is similar. We went over the stats a month ago or so, Jergul and Hood can verify.

"The new study surveyed 1,369 men over the age of 18, who responded to leaflets handed out in train stations across Belgium."

There are limitations in this method of sampling. When ever you leave it up to "who ever responds", you have decreased the quality and the extent to which the conclusions can be generalized, if at all.

"It's not a very big difference in sensitivity, but it's a significant difference,"

Which is, meh for this specific issue.

"But Dr. Aaron Tobian, who studies circumcision but was not part of the new study, said that previous randomized controlled trials - considered the gold standard of medical research - looked at sexual performance and satisfaction. Those studies, he said, did not find a difference."

Ah there we go, randomized controlled trials. Nothing.

The End.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed May 16 14:39:23
enough w/ the penis talk... has baby yoga taken off?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7ihdsjIqhI
Nekran
Member
Wed May 16 14:50:21
I did not for a second look at the study or actually care about it... just thought it a funny observation.

"Ah there we go, randomized controlled trials. Nothing."

When it comes to reported performance and satisfaction. I would not expect any differences there.

Fact is that they are less sensitive because of the loss of protection though. It's kind of like having a callused dick... *shrugs*

On a related note, masturbation wihtout foreskin is also a seriously weird idea to me. Foreskin rules! Don't take it away from your child.

Also imo chopping bits off your child without a medical reason to do so should be illegal.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed May 16 14:52:56
"Also imo chopping bits off your child without a medical reason to do so should be illegal."

yups
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 15:15:47
I actually find it strange, that I never contemplated doing it, long before he was born and I met my wife, it was pretty much settled in my head. While not on the same level, I am not a big fan of piercing the ears of 1 year old baby girls, which is not that uncommon. Jesus Christ, let her grow up a little first? I am sure all these boys and girls turn out fine and dandy, but to me personally I would be violating the physical integrity of someone else.

Now imagine the cluster fuck of a "talk" when he notices this! Normally you get away with, this is a penis, that is a vagina. Now I have to tie in religion and god as well for it to be coherent.
hood
Member
Wed May 16 15:16:30
Nekran:

Your opinion does not equate to data.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed May 16 16:10:23
lol
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed May 16 16:23:31
"When it comes to reported performance and satisfaction. I would not expect any differences there."

Though you kinda did.

"Snipped dicks feel less pleasure"

Unless "satisfaction" and "pleasure" are defined as very different things. To me sensitivity, pleasure, satisfaction and performance are distinctions without a difference here. You are splitting pubic hairs :P

Let just say, it is completely unnecessary like like a lot of shit human engage in, the benefits broadly are doubtful, but so are the risks and downsides.

I think we nail it on the head, discussing whose dick is the greatest and most beautiful thousands of years later, as to why our Abrahamic ancestors did this. PUSSY! In a world of sleepy uncut dicks, the circumcised man is king! It probably started as a dare. YOU KNOW IT DID!
jergul
large member
Wed May 16 16:25:04
It probably started as an ingredient for some medical remedy or another.

patom
Member
Wed May 16 17:43:27
Congratulations Nimatzo. May he grow up in a more peaceful world.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 07:57:03
My brother in law had to have a circumcision at 13 for medical reasons (it was too small).

He says it reduced sensitivity. Which makes sense.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 07:59:09
Nim:

How would a randomised controlled trial work? How would an individual compare satisfaction?

Surely all you'd get is all parties reporting sex is good?

You need people talking who have experienced both...

obaminated
Member
Thu May 17 08:09:21
Your brother in laws dick was too small? So he had to be circumcised for medical reasons? Thats hilarious.
hood
Member
Thu May 17 08:21:14
"How would a randomised controlled trial work? How would an individual compare satisfaction?"

Run brain scans of people while being subjected to a control stimulus, create baseline. Run same procedure on test subjects, create individual baselines of their brain reactions. Run pleasure test on individuals, measure intensity compared to baseline stimulus. Aggregate data based on inclusion/exclusion of foreskin.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 09:29:07
Obaminated:

Other way around. His dick was too big for his foreskin.

Hood:
Dubious - it's probably the best you could do but establishing the link between physiological response of blood flow in brain to qualia is very ropey.

hood
Member
Thu May 17 09:35:18
Blood flow? Bro, synapse response. See how the brain processes the sensation compared to others after adjusting their results for deviation to the norm of the control stimulus.


Also, something y'all seem to be missing:
Circumcision doesn't lop off the head or anything. You're still going to get full sensation there (and it's more sensitive than foreskin). Any reduced sensation in the shaft isn't going to affect the sensation in the head and will contribute less to the overall sensation experienced than you seem to think.

And for the non-puritains, there's yet still other stimuli that one can introduce beyond just foreskin and head touching to enhance overall sensation. If, of course, you're adventurous.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu May 17 10:31:29
I did not dive deeper and read that study. I assumed they were not talking out of their ass. Surely it must be of better quality than ”my friend said so”? :P

I have to check it out when I get home.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 10:32:35
hood:

What the PET scans of brains actually show is glucose metabolism and bloodflow which are taken as proxies for synaptic activity. Are you suggesting a different approach I'm not thinking of here?

But even if you were say, measuring actual voltages and currents in neurons, linking that to qualia is very hand wavey. I think it would be hard to show that say, a "strong orgasm" looked like on a PET vs a "weak orgasm" were relative only for the individual. i.e. if it really is the case that the best orgasm a circumcised person could have is objectively less pleasurable than the one they could have if they were intact, it is not necessarily given that both, experiencing the strongest orgasm they can experience, would look any different on a PET.

I don't think people are thinking the foreskin is sensitive, rather the mechanical role it plays, and that leaving the sensitive head exposed would lead to desensitisation.




hood
Member
Thu May 17 11:05:26
"I don't think people are thinking the foreskin is sensitive, rather the mechanical role it plays, and that leaving the sensitive head exposed would lead to desensitisation."

Fair point here.


"if it really is the case that the best orgasm a circumcised person could have is objectively less pleasurable than the one they could have if they were intact, it is not necessarily given that both, experiencing the strongest orgasm they can experience, would look any different on a PET."

But that's kind of the point. If people perceive the same effect, even through different raw input, you can't say person A had a less pleasurable orgasm than person B if they perceive the events equally.



Per testing:
fMRI is likely the best test - but apparently that one does also measure blood flow. However, it would likely be more helpful than a PET.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 11:15:52
I think my challenge here is whether we can infer different degree of perception between individuals.

I think the only effective way is to ask people who experience both.

FMRI! Yes, that's the one. I was having a brain fart.

Btw, take both with a pinch of salt. Google fmri and dead trout.
hood
Member
Thu May 17 11:23:10
"I think the only effective way is to ask people who experience both."

I disagree. There a distinct difference between having something taken away and never having it at all. Take me for example: I have never been able to smell. Not once in my life. People who lose their sense of smell often talk about how their sense of taste feels diminished after losing smell. Me? My taste seems to be just fine, if my ability to modify recipes over time to (relative) perfection is any indication.

People who were circumcized young never had a chance to experience what having foreskin is like. It's not unreasonable to make inference that their bodies will have adapted, much like my taste.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 11:51:39
Fair point.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Thu May 17 11:59:12

still not seeing a good reason for a healthy body part to be hacked off.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu May 17 12:06:46
what about female body hair?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu May 17 12:13:28
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18761593/

Abstract
INTRODUCTION:
Male circumcision is being promoted for HIV prevention in high-risk heterosexual populations. However, there is a concern that circumcision may impair sexual function.

AIM:
To assess adult male circumcision's effect on men's sexual function and pleasure.

METHODS:
Participants in a controlled trial of circumcision to reduce HIV incidence in Kisumu, Kenya were uncircumcised, HIV negative, sexually active men, aged 18-24 years, with a hemoglobin >or=9.0 mmol/L. Exclusion criteria included foreskin covering less than half the glans, a condition that might unduly increase surgical risks, or a medical indication for circumcision. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either immediate circumcision or delayed circumcision after 2 years (control group). Detailed evaluations occurred at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
(i) Sexual function between circumcised and uncircumcised men; and (ii) sexual satisfaction and pleasure over time following circumcision.

RESULTS:
Between February 2002 and September 2005, 2,784 participants were randomized, including the 100 excluded from this analysis because they crossed over, were not circumcised within 30 days of randomization, did not complete baseline interviews, or were outside the age range. For the circumcision and control groups, respectively, rates of any reported sexual dysfunction decreased from 23.6% and 25.9% at baseline to 6.2% and 5.8% at month 24. Changes over time were not associated with circumcision status. Compared to before they were circumcised, 64.0% of circumcised men reported their penis was "much more sensitive," and 54.5% rated their ease of reaching orgasm as "much more" at month 24.

CONCLUSIONS:
Adult male circumcision was not associated with sexual dysfunction. Circumcised men reported increased penile sensitivity and enhanced ease of reaching orgasm. These data indicate that integration of male circumcision into programs to reduce HIV risk is unlikely to adversely effect male sexual function.



Sexual dysfunction is measurable objectively, but a bit blunt compared to loss of sensitivity. I would plow through all the studies cited wiki about this, but I feel like I have already spent too much on a topic I am not THAT interested in. I think if we take the two studies we have here and the points that hood raised, I still walk away with...meh *shrug*.
obaminated
Member
Thu May 17 12:29:08
"Other way around. His dick was too big for his foreskin. "

nah, ill go with the nub being incapable of pushing past the foreskin over your BIL dick being so huge that surgery was required.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 14:24:15
Obaminated:

You imagine whatever floats your boat!

But the issue was that the foreskin didn't draw back over the head easily when he got a boner, so unless he got the foreskin in position before hand... Well ouch. More about girth than length.

Do you remember being 13? That would be quite the inconvenience. Just hearing about it was mildly traumatic. I think he mentioned something about rips.

As to his overall ... dimensions ... I've never seen or asked if it was his dick being to big or foreskin too small. But the string of good looking girlfriends tend to suggest he had no problems.
McKobb
Member
Thu May 17 14:31:35
Congratulations. You are now a fully functioning human!
hood
Member
Thu May 17 14:43:13
"But the string of good looking girlfriends tend to suggest he had no problems."

Or the fact that they kept leaving indicated that he did.

Ugh, now I'm talking about an actual, specific penis instead of just sexual pleasure. I hate you all.
Seb
Member
Thu May 17 14:47:32
He left them.

Settled down now though in Germany and having a kid.
obaminated
Member
Thu May 17 15:27:47
Seb, you are full of shit.

Brother in laws don't talk about dick sizes or abilities.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu May 17 16:07:44
This thread recovered now that seb and obaminated are debating the size of seb friends dick.

Seb
Member
Thu May 17 16:39:30
Obaminated:

He's cosa rican, and his parents were hippies, so didn't grow up with your hangups. He delights in trying to disconcert the Brit.

Basically we were having pretty much the same conversation we started here about circumcision over some beers while he and my wife were smoking weed.

Do you really think I'm making all this up?

Well, up to you mate.



Seb
Member
Thu May 17 16:40:12
Nim:

Relative size of his foreskin to penis girth. Let's be precise.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu May 17 16:57:38
"Basically we were having pretty much the same conversation we started here about circumcision over some beers while he and my wife were smoking weed."

Beer, weed and talking dicks.
This is the backstory to when seb gets cucked.

I COULD NOT RESIST!
obaminated
Member
Thu May 17 19:05:30
So, seb, at what point did Rico, your brother in law, guide your wife to the bathroom?
Hrothgar
Member
Fri May 18 01:16:43
Congrats Nimatzo! Yeah kids are pretty awesome and a huge stress/worry at the same time.

Don't stress too much about forging them into some kind of adult you picture in your head. Most of the instincts of person they will be is very inborn. Best a parent can do is help them find the positive ways to use those inborn instincts.

Trying to shoehorn them into something like religion/career, if it's not in line with their inborn instinct, just causes quite internal strain in their lives as they worry about not feeling very successful or interested and worry about disappointing people around them such as their parents.

Basically, don't try to forge them into YOUR perfect flower. Help them discover what kind of flower they are, and then just water them carefully, offer protection to them from the unexpected/unpredictable stormy winds, and then sit back and watch them bloom in whatever way comes naturally to them.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri May 18 03:39:31
Thanks Hrothgar and I agree with all the things you wrote. My only expectation, and I told my son this 5 minutes after he was born, don't be a fucking idiot. To that extent I only hope to be a good mentor and teacher, regardless of the (non fucking idiot) path he chooses.
Seb
Member
Fri May 18 08:43:10
Nim/Obaminated:

Er, you do both understand what relationship a brother in law means right?



hood
Member
Fri May 18 09:07:54
"Er, you do both understand what relationship a brother in law means right?"

The spouse of your sibling and/or the sibling of your spouse. Pretty obvious they were assuming spouse of a sibling.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri May 18 09:59:15
Incest is a thing, yes. :P
Remember the OP? Me neither. Here we are.
Seb
Member
Fri May 18 13:23:47
Er I don't think spouse of my sibling is an in law.
Seb
Member
Fri May 18 13:24:51
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parent-in-law
hood
Member
Fri May 18 13:33:09
....
"Brother in law"
-links to parent in law-

Seriously Seb?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibling-in-law

I don't think you understand words.
obaminated
Member
Fri May 18 23:30:07
seriously seb, wtf. like, how dumb are you ? so your sister gets married and you don't call the person she is married to as "brother in law"?

JFC man. you are dumb. ya know what.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl17CYYSzUw

get your shit together.
obaminated
Member
Fri May 18 23:30:28
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl17CYYSzUw
Seb
Member
Sat May 19 04:13:16
Obaminated:

I guess I wasn't thinking it though very carefully. I was thinking "how do I wind up with a brother in law", and I only have brothers.

Hood:
That page came up when I googled "in laws family", and contains the necessary info: " A person is a son-in-law or daughter-in-law to the parents of the spouse."

Not sure why you are so upset about not finding the canonical web page.

You are increasingly coming off as excessively anal.
McKobb
Member
Sat May 19 04:29:14
Nim, make sure your spawn gets choline
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sat May 19 04:32:56
Why?
McKobb
Member
Sat May 19 04:43:56
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choline

Basically recall booster for carpet crawlers less than four years. Folate too but everyone forgets choline.
Seb
Member
Sat May 19 06:02:57
Also somehow I parsed hoods statement to mean the brother of my brother's wufe. Who would not be my in law
hood
Member
Sat May 19 09:09:25
As I said, you don't know words.
obaminated
Member
Sat May 19 10:31:47
Seb, please bow out. this is embarrassing.
TJ
Member
Sat May 19 11:00:45
Approximately 46 million lumps of cells are aborted yearly worldwide and universally accepted as a mothers right of disposal.

It is much easier for me to accept a genocide on foreskins. Sensitivity be damned. Pun intended...; brain dead individuals might feel pain. Twisted values abound.



Seb
Member
Sat May 19 11:08:10
Obaminated:
I rather thought I had!

Hood:

Oh please. You are utterly incoherent half the time, and merely confused the rest.
hood
Member
Sat May 19 13:11:16
You seem to be the only person who has trouble understanding me. I dare say it is due to the many documented instances of you being utterly incapable of comprehending english.
Seb
Member
Sun May 20 16:42:32
Hood:

Look at the last thread you and I spoke on. You fundamentally didn't understand the point I was making, and then started complaining that I was making a poor argument because I wasn't arguing the point you insisted I should be.

I really think the problem is likely to be yours and the one or two fellow travellers you have.

hood
Member
Sun May 20 17:09:22
Yes, the thread where you ramble on about half assed arguments and then drone on about how it isn't in scope. Woe is me for recognizing 2 posts in that you're again going to be pointlessly picky without ever considering context.


"the one or two fellow travellers you have."

There are more than one or two people posting here. Almost all of them have, at one point or another, pointed out your dishonest argumentation style. Many times have people pointed out that you legitimately do not understand words. Or would you like to again revisit how a day ago you didn't think an in-law could be the spouse of your sibling? Should we also point out that whatever "I cannot fucking read because I'm Seb" interpretation of my point IS ALSO A FUCKING IN-LAW despite you suggesting it isn't?

"the brother of my brother's wufe. Who would not be my in law"

The brother of your brother's wife is an in-law. You two are related by the lawful marriage of your brother and his sister.


You. Do. Not. Understand. Words. Any words. Words are fucking beyond you.
Seb
Member
Sun May 20 17:25:29
Hood:

Nothing half arsed in what I said. What was half arsed was your random insistence of whataboutery.

No, the brother of my brother's wife is not my in law. It's my brothers. Check the definition.

"The spouse of your sibling" he's not the spouse of my sibling. He's the brother of the spouse of my sibling.

"and/or the sibling of your spouse"
He is not the sibling of my spouse. He's the sibling of my brother's spouse.

Helpful to think in terms of whether he's the son of my father and mother in law (cf link I posted). Nope. He's the son of my *brother's* father and mother in law; who certainly are not my in laws.


Seb
Member
Sun May 20 17:28:03
So, did you just make a thoughtless error or are you unable to read?

You're such an emotional, whiny hypocrite hood. It's why your such a drab, boring person to converse with. As thick as Sam, except for your precious, fragile skin.
hood
Member
Sun May 20 17:38:58
"No, the brother of my brother's wife is not my in law. It's my brothers. Check the definition."

Some people like to use the phrase "co-brother-in-law" to signify that they are related to the family by marriage (i.e. your brother) and not specifically you. Still your bro-in-law.


"You're such an emotional, whiny hypocrite hood."

You should stop trying to interpret emotion from my posts, something I have to keep reminding you of. I've been faking emotion for over a decade. This is the internet. You're doubly fucked for trying to ascribe anything to me.

I'd also be well interested in how you came to "hypocrite."


"It's why your such a drab, boring person to converse with."

Someone trying to show off their vocabulary? Your insults burn and they burn deep. I shall shed a tear into my pillow tonight, all because of you.
Seb
Member
Sun May 20 18:17:24
Hood:

I.e. some people use an entirely different term to refer to an entirely different relationship - Mr "understands words".

I think the phrase you are looking for is "oops, yeah, I fucked up". A great example on how to do this at May 19 04:13:16 in this thread.

You are pathologically unable to accept when you fuck up, which is made much worse for how ungracious you are when others do admit it.

"Someone trying to show off their vocabulary?"

You think *that* is rich vocabulary? That's funny.
hood
Member
Sun May 20 18:45:11
"I.e. some people use an entirely different term to refer to an entirely different relationship"

No. I.e. the concept exists and some people distinguish between your marriage and your sibling's marriage.


"I think the phrase you are looking for is "oops, yeah, I fucked up"."

I use the words I intend to use, barring typos.


"You are pathologically unable to accept when you fuck up"

I admit it when I do it. It doesn't happen here very often.


"ungracious you are when others do admit it."

Well see, when someone is absolutely insistent when they are correct, despite it being plain to see for every fucking person, yes I'm going to point out that they were insistently wrong. If someone fucks up and is just "oh, right, whoops" then I generally just drop it.

Unless there's context, like your epic inability to understand words.


"You think *that* is rich vocabulary? That's funny."

I do hope you're saying that because you recognized my sarcastic taunting.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 01:53:50
Hood:

So, you think that my brothers sides parents are my father and mother in law?

There is literally nobody who uses this definition. In any case, you are now introducing a new definition. It is clearly not covered by the one you posted - and you are very clear you always use the words you intend to. So when you say "don't understand words", what you actually meant was "here is an additional definition that covers that relationship too". Once again, incoherent muddled thinking. There is no way the definition you posted can mean sibling of a siblings spouse.

"I do hope you're saying that because you recognized my sarcastic taunting"
That was sarcastic was it? Did you feel the words I used were too mundane?
hood
Member
Mon May 21 07:27:44
"That was sarcastic was it?"

Perhaps you shouldn't try to guess emotions of people when you cannot detect simple sarcasm. Or do you also think I cried 1 tear into my pillow last night all because of your harsh words calling me drab and boring (kinda repetitive, no?)?

"In any case, you are now introducing a new definition."

Speaking of hypocrite!
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 07:35:43
hood:

"Perhaps you shouldn't try to guess emotions of people when you cannot detect simple sarcasm."

Perhaps you shouldn't attempt sarcasm when it is so close to your actual arguments? What in the end was the point you were seeking to make then - that my perfectly normal language was over the top, or that it was overly simplistic?


"Or do you also think I cried 1 tear into my pillow last night"

No, and why would I?

And look how you are zeroing in or the sterile arguments arising from your own incoherent and irrelevant points and ignoring the substantive point, that while accusing me of not understanding simple words, failing to appreciate that the definition you posted does not and cannot admit "sibling of my siblings spouse" to be sibling in law; and requires an extended definition.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 07:37:44
And no, I did recognise "weeping into your pillow" as being sarcastic.

The previous bit though - if it's sarcastic, I'm not sure what it is you are being sarcastic about exactly. Rather, it looks like you are having one of your normal toy-pram ejections.

hood
Member
Mon May 21 07:57:04
"The previous bit though - if it's sarcastic, I'm not sure what it is you are being sarcastic about exactly."

So you don't understand sarcasm now? I was poking fun at your choice of insults. Well, more like mocking, but hopefully you get the idea.


"And look how you are zeroing in or the sterile arguments"

I have made my points and you keep trying to wave Wikipedia at me. I'm not interested in your general lack of context, imagination, or intelligence. Feel free to keep arguing about in-laws. I am satisfied, content even, in the recognition that you continually cannot comprehend English. Including sarcasm and the point behind it (which, I will admit would likely be difficult for you since the motivation of sarcasm changes based on context - and you already cannot comprehend context).

God damn. It's a bit saddening that I have to spend more time explaining English to you than just calling you a dumb, bumbling fucknut. And yes, when I say saddening I am not talking about my own emotional experience. It's conversational banter. You are a depressing person.
hood
Member
Mon May 21 07:59:38
Oh, imma pull a Seb and double post:

""Or do you also think I cried 1 tear into my pillow last night"

No, and why would I?"

See above comments about your inability to comprehend context. If you saw the comment about shedding a tear and you thought "oh well that's obviously not true," then most people would interpret the entire paragraph to be of the same context and, generally, would pick up on the mocking sarcasm.

When did the Brits lose their humor?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon May 21 09:11:37
When Benny Hill died, if you ask Hot Rod.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 09:28:19
Hood:
Those were simple descriptions. And the fun you were poking was related to the bring what, insufficiently grandiloquent?

Simple fact: you argue I'm incapable of "understanding words", yet the words, the words *you* posted, that define brother in law do not allow for "brother of my brother's wife" to be a brother in law.

Is that not a fact Hood?

When did I lose my humour? You're the most humourless little whinge I've ever come across!

"then most people would interpret the entire paragraph to be of the same context"
The context one infers from your post is "oh, there goes hood again throwing his toys put of his pram. First hes whining about vocabular and then pulling a high school version of sticks and stones. Normally someone saying "trying to showoff your vocabulary" would be dismissing someone deploying uncessarily complex language.

Hood, i'm sorry to disappoint you, but you come across as a whiny little twit, not the erudite and sophisticated wit you imagine yourself to be.
hood
Member
Mon May 21 10:00:27
"the words, the words *you* posted, that define brother in law do not allow for "brother of my brother's wife" to be a brother in law."

I'll grant you one final response to the inlaw conundrum:

????????? Do you see exclusion criteria? "Do not allow"? All it does is give positive examples, not negative ones. But in any case, we can work through it logically:

"By gender, this is specified as brother-in-law for one's spouse's brother, one's sibling's husband, or one's spouse's sibling's husband"

That last one: spouse's sibling's husband. We have a relationship of marriage, a relation of blood, and another relation of marriage. You're suggesting a relationship of blood, marriage, blood is something less inlaw-y than one of 2 legal bindings?

Your brother's wife's brother has only one legal binding.

We can go further via link on Wikipedia:
http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/sibling-in-law

In this, the definition specifically denotes 1 link of marriage as the standard separation for in-laws. Your brother's wife's brother is indeed 1 legal separation and 2 blood separations. And they are of the same generation as you are.

That link even mentions the co-in-laws concept as the double legal separation that the previous link included as an example of plain in-laws.

It should be noted that the second example for co-in-laws, sibling of spouse's sibling is actually just 1 degree of marriage, not 2. You will, however, notice that it is still considered a sibling-in-law, so splitting hairs about the specific type of sibling in law seems tedious and petty at best. I think the best judge is life: do you consider the guy family? It's he the same generation? He's a sibling by law, not by blood. Plain, old intuition without the fussy mess of having to spank you with dictionaries.

Do you require further abuse on this subject?


"When did I lose my humour? You're the most humourless little whinge I've ever come across!"

Again, the sting of your insults. I know not how to bear such verbal beatings.


"The context one infers from your post is"

Minor correction: the context Seb infers*. One cannot extend Seb interpretations to the general populace with any degree of accuracy.


"First hes whining about vocabular and then pulling a high school version of sticks and stones."

You again misread. It is not sticks and stones. Sticks and stones implies that one is receiving insults, refusing to reply, and stating that those insults are not bothersome. I am actively mocking you for your choice of insults; my actions are far removed from taking any moral high road. I am saying that your insults are drab and I find amusement from that complete lack of creativity. You might as well conjure up insults from the Roman empire, I'm sure they will be equally stinging in their relevancy.

Oh, look, Seb can't seem to interpret childhood interactions. Nobody is surprised.


"Normally someone saying "trying to showoff your vocabulary" would be dismissing someone deploying uncessarily complex language."

Yes, if there was no sarcasm involved I would agree. However, your rigid 1:1 use of language doesn't allow you to interpret words or phrases to mean anything but the singular use case that you've used so I feel it entirely wasteful to attempt to describe the modifications to that phrase one might interpret when considering the introduction of sarcasm.


"Hood, i'm sorry to disappoint you, but you come across as a whiny little twit, not the erudite and sophisticated wit you imagine yourself to be."

It's a good thing that your reality is about as accurate as hot rods, else I might be in trouble in the real world.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 11:15:46
Hood:

That's not the definition you posted.
What you posted was:

"The spouse of your sibling and/or the sibling of your spouse. Pretty obvious they were assuming spouse of a sibling."

Dishonest hood.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 11:18:50
As I said, you have to explicitly extend the definition to include the sibling of your siblings spouse.

So you cannot legitimately accuse me of not understanding what you posted. I understand it perfectly well.

As for the new definition you inserted, nobody in the UK i know uses that relation, and I see it was added a few days ago. I'm going to assume that wiki editor comes from a non Anglo culture.
hood
Member
Mon May 21 12:14:28
"That's not the definition you posted.
What you posted was:

"The spouse of your sibling and/or the sibling of your spouse. Pretty obvious they were assuming spouse of a sibling."

Dishonest hood."

Grasping at straws. Desperation is not a good look on you.


"nobody in the UK"

The UK hasn't been relevant for over a centry. Or are you suggesting that your entire country is fucked with language comprehension?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon May 21 13:29:11
I think the most important part was that a guy and your wife were smoking weed and then he banged her. I mean ffs the thread went of the rails in the second post and I encouraged it. To split the hairs of sibling in law this or that, boys, that boat left the harbor, got torpedoed and then the sharks ate the survivors.
Rugian
Member
Mon May 21 13:35:47
Allahuakbar really did ruin this entire thread. Well done, ragi.

Anyway, I'm glad your kid makes you happy or whatever.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon May 21 13:39:02
Thanks, or something like that.
Seb
Member
Mon May 21 13:40:25
hood:

The entire discussion here is whether you can claim I don't understand words or not. So no, it's not grasping at straws to point out that actually it is very clear from the definition you posted, rather than the one you have now introduced, very clearly supports the position that a siblings spouses sibling is not an in-law.

You are the one grasping at straws here by introducing new information after the fact and suggesting it supports your earlier argument.It doesn't.

You are so bad at logical thinking Hood. And dishonest too.


Nim:
No, my wife and her brother did not bang.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon May 21 13:43:33
That is good, I guess.(???)
Rugian
Member
Mon May 21 13:46:14
That's too bad; if they were to film it, incest porn is pretty trendy right now.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon May 21 13:49:18
I can always count on you Rugian :,)
show deleted posts
Bookmark and Share