Community > Posts By > Gwendolyn2009
"If you are handsome, smart, and witty, you might get lucky tonight."
|
|
|
|
I am a slender guy and I can fit into a pair of jeans most wemon dream about wearing. I can fit into a size 28 or 29 depending on brand. So if I showed up on a first date with you wearing a pair of low rise supper skinny Levis jeans what would your first thought be. I would think that your skinny derriere is TOO skinny. |
|
|
|
Please...anyone....pleez end my misery Seriously, i am not a bad person because I can not make a crappy relationship work out! Yes, I was still not over my ex & this idiot was well aware of that fact when he decide he should move in with me. While in said crappy LTR I did not see or speak with my other ex, except when I sent him divorce papers. I broke up with the drunk/pill-headed idiot and still did not reconnect with the ex hubby for several months! No, I never got over the ex hubby, but I did everything possible to do so and behaved respectfully while with him! Now I am some evil heartless beeotch dealing out misery and pain and ruining the lives of men across the world & chit! He told me I should be happy now that his life is completely miserable & I said, "well that's not my fault"! According to him it is because I chose to "be with him" & then (after many drunk/pill popping crazy episodes) decided not to so now he has to live with his momma in the hood where life is chitty! Her car broke down & now he's walking to/from work, apparently somehow my fault too. I was being nice before this & offered to give him a ride home after work since I was heading to that part of town-->WTF? pleez, just shoot me!!! He can effin walk now 4 sure You are responsible for your happiness--and your misery. Every choice in your life was your decision, and if you allowed others to influence your decisions, that was your choice, eh? Methinks that you want sympathy, but what you really need is to stop blaming other and stop looking for excuses as to why your relationships fail. I will give you the best piece of advice that anyone can give you, but I have the feeling that you will whine and reject it. Here goes, anyway: Leave the men alone--and leave them alone for a long time. Work on your relationship with yourself, not guys whom you allow to bring you down. Get the guys out of your life, and then, you and ONLY you are responsible for how your life will go. No one can take advantage of you unless you let him. No one can control you unless you give over control. No one can make you feel bad about yourself and your life unless you allow that. Shut them out--and if you let them for any reason, whose decision is that? |
|
|
|
Topic:
Locked hair
|
|
Um, how many religions have "locked" hair? I can't think of many. In fact, I can only think of Rasta.
Enlighten me. |
|
|
|
7 Brutal Truths About Atheism http://jackhudson.wordpress.com/2010/08/20/7-brutal-truths-about-atheism/ I have covered a few of these points in my Atheist Contradictions posts, but I wanted to create a comprehensive list of what I considered to be a number of realities that emanate from atheistic belief – brutal realities that are certainly true if atheism is true. In and of themselves these do not disprove atheism, but they do detail the cost of atheist’s beliefs. Most of these truths are acknowledged by various atheists. 1.Your life has no meaning or purpose One obvious conclusion of believing that life and the universe are the result of wholly incidental material interactions is that one’s life has no inherent meaning. There is no reason why an atheist is here – and the atheist’s existence will serve no ultimate purpose. The typical rejoinder amongst atheists is that they can make or find their own meaning, which apparently means they can pretend there is meaning to their lives – but they seem to miss the fact that this is exactly what they criticize the religious of doing. In the final analysis to be an atheist is to either acknowledge that one’s existence does not ultimately matter or to live a life of pretense. 2.You are an atheist by virtue of when and where you were born Atheists like to say this about the religious (in an attempt to reduce religious belief down something we unthinkingly inherit from our parents) but the reality is while people convert to and from various religions all around the world, atheists are by in large concentrated in the more advanced industrial nations. The reason for that is simple – being an atheist really only works for the relatively wealthy and comfortable. Most of the world outside of industrialized countries must endure the harsh realities of life – hunger, disease, violence, shorter lives. This flippant atheist tagline, “There’s probably no God… now stop worrying and enjoy your life” makes absolutely no sense if one lives in a slum in Africa or India, or under one deals daily with the ravages of drug cartels in some central American city. Atheists are atheists because they have the luxury of denying the reality of that which gives human lives essential dignity, and still living comfortable lives themselves. 3.You can never be certain that what you believe to be true is true There is no basis in atheism for any confidence in one’s ability to discern what is and isn’t true about reality. The reason for this is because if one’s main instrument for deriving beliefs about reality (one’s physical brain) is the product of undirected incidental forces then there is no guarantee that this instrument is accurate in that respect. In fact, there is much reason to believe our cognitive equipment is faulty. So atheism contains its own internal defeater; if atheism is true, there is no reason for an atheist to be confident that atheism is true. 4.There is no objective way to evaluate moral choices This is another truth that invites atheists to imagine something that can’t actually exist. In a purposeless universe, there is no basis for contending that creatures who incidentally evolved there should behave in a particular manner; there is no anchor to which we can tether an idea of right or wrong moral choices. From an atheist perspective moral claims are wholly derived from our own mental faculties – and as we saw in the previous point that would make them fairly arbitrary. This is especially true considering there are competing claims about right and wrong behavior. So then while an atheist might desire to act a certain way or desire that others acted in a certain way, he or she can never say others should act in a certain way as no human behavior is actually ever ‘wrong’ in any objective sense. Atheists often argue that they are as moral as any religious believer – but such a claim requires morals to exist in the first place. 5.The most brutal regimes have been atheistic In their opposition to religion, atheists often like to point out that religious belief has historically often been a source of violence and persecution. While this neither proves nor disproves the existence of God; it certainly seems to make a belief in God undesirable. Unfortunately for atheists, they have some of their own history to deal with. In the early and mid 20th century, atheism, thanks to communism, was at its zenith historically. More than any time in history, a number of governments were overtly atheistic – there was no religious belief to motivate their leaders and armies. And it was during that time and in those places that the most horrible actions were taken – perhaps the worst in the history of man. The governments of Stalin, Mao, the various leaders of North Korea and Vietnam, as well as various regimes in Eastern Europe, Africa and South America killed tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of people all told. They imprisoned millions more merely for their religious or political beliefs. The worst forms of torture and forced labor occurred under these systems, and many places have never fully recovered from the ravages of those times. If one were to evaluate beliefs based on the degree of pain and violence those beliefs provoked, then atheism would certainly be the standard for motivating horrible behavior. 6.Human rights and equality don’t exist In the atheist scheme of reality, only that which has a physical component can exist, so claims of inherent rights or human equality are necessarily understood to be, like morals, wholly illusory. Take for example the concept of human equality. In American political philosophy our equality derives from the notion that we were created by God as equal persons of equal worth. What is equal about two humans in this view isn’t their physical qualities but intrinsic ones, a worth that can’t be diminished. On the other hand, people are inherently unequal according to any physical or biological measure. A person with substantive intelligence would certainly be more valuable than someone with a mental defect. A healthy person who can contribute to society would have more much worth than an ill or handicapped person –and so in a world where only that which was physical is real, ‘equality’ could not exist. Much the same could be said of the notions of rights or liberties – these entities can’t be found in a materialistic universe. This would explain in part why wholly atheistic regimes have such atrocious human rights records – they are under no obligation to recognize intrinsic human worth. 7.You will always be a small minority The reality is as long as there have been recognizable human communities, there have been religious beliefs. Ideas about God or gods were the foundation of musicality, art, literature, even civilization itself. Our capacity for spiritual comprehension is our most distinguishing factor – perhaps more than any other thing that is what it means to be human. Even today, religious belief persists and is growing in the world – and this is made even more the case as primarily secular societies fade due to lack of procreation. If several thousand years of human history and all current trends are any indication, atheism is in its twilight years not its infancy. Atheists will no doubt contest one or more of these claims, or find ways to wish away or excuse the reality of these claims. All of these claims has either been demonstrated by history or certain facts, and are completely consistent with atheistic beliefs and thus easy enough to defend. One could argue whether atheism is true; one can never say that it is a idea that is inconsequential. "Brutal" is defined on dictionary.com as: –adjective 1.savage; cruel; inhuman: a brutal attack on the village. 2.crude; coarse: brutal language. 3.harsh; ferocious: brutal criticism; brutal weather. 4.taxing, demanding, or exhausting: They're having a brutal time making ends meet. 5.irrational; unreasoning. 6.of or pertaining to lower animals. I must say that the #5 applies to your "brutal" truths for atheists because you are not logical nor do you apply reasoning. Also, you are, by your own admission, making "claims"--they are not truths or facts, but your opinions based on your own illogical needs to prove the existence of a god; therefore, you validate your beliefs and even yourself. 1. Who are you to judge the meaning of life for anyone? Being alive is merely enough to establish meaning! I enjoy my job: it gives meaning to my life (I teach). I love my family and friends: they give meaning to my life. I have many purposes. 2. Actually, I WAS a Christian by the "virtue" of being born into a Christian family. I was indoctrinated from the time I was able to understand language. In fact, I am sure that it even started before then. At this point, I am more of an agnostic than an atheist, but in my vast contact with religious people, most believe because their parents believed. Yet I have met no atheists who are atheists because their parents were. 3. What is your point? You can claim to be certain about what you believe, but that doesn't mean it is so! 4. Of course there are objective ways to evaluate ETHICAL choices--forget morals. I have NO morals, but I am quite ethical. Ethics are culturally determined, and as such, we have civil laws set in place to protect humans from other humans. If there were no religion, the same laws would still be in place. If Christians claim supremacy in the area of ethics, I would point to older, pagan societies that had the same frickin' laws! 5. Since there have been few atheistic regimes, let's come back in a few thousand years to evaluate this one. However, whether regimes have been religious or atheist, it is a moot point: humans are cruel and they use religion or other types of ideology to validate their need for power and control. To say that atheist regimes have been more corrupt or brutal than religious regimes is not true--no one has the monopoly on cruelty. 6. This is so illogical I don't even know where to start, but let me go waaaaay back. There is evidence that ancient humans took care of their less fortunate companions. Remains of human skeletons show bones set, skulls trepanned, and other aspects of medical treatment. Trust me, these cultures were not governed by Christians. I also suggest that you read the Hebrew Scriptures where people with diseases were outcasts. If your #6 "proves" this is why atheist regimes have been so cruel, how do you explain pogroms, ghettos, slavery and other atrocities committed by religious people. Oh, I know! They weren't REAL Christians! 7. What is your point? Because a majority of people "believe" something, does it make it a "fact"? When pagan Rome was at its peak, does that mean they had the "right" belief until it was superseded by Christianity? In India, Hinduism has been the prime religion for centuries, does that mean they are "right"? If Muslims take over the world, including your Christian sector, does that mean that Islam is "right"? In addition, you make claims that you do not substantiate. You say most of these "truths" are substantiated by most atheists; please, give me their names. You make illogical claims that are based on fallacies, i.e. these things are true if atheism is "true." I could point to the crusades, witch burnings, the Inquisition and many other aspects as exemplifying the "truth" of religion, eh? |
|
|
|
Topic:
Feel your hate!
|
|
People who wallow in their ignorance and are even proud of it.
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Pshaw!!!
|
|
Sorry Gwen darling your a waste of time and space go into the other forums believe me those people will rip ya a new one and watch ya bleed See ya there! Ah, my dear, unlike you, I have a life outside of forums. I don't have time to invest in a plethora of forums. And it is "You're a waste [. . .]." And if you want to write, learn how to use punctuation. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Pshaw!!!
Edited by
Gwendolyn2009
on
Tue 07/27/10 03:46 PM
|
|
One more thing: to the poet, you totally misunderstood my reference to "reality." You used a stereotypical cliche: the good don't always die young and the evil don't always live long and prosper, not even in your world.
The lines: "Personally I’m tired of robbing Peter to pay Paul./ Conversely I’d rather hop in a barrel and go over Niagara Falls." The old, overused cliche of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" lacks imagination, creativity and originality. Why not use YOUR words instead of a phrase that has been around for a very long time? Using cliches is the sign of a lazy, unimaginative author. By the same token, what creative purpose does hopping "in a barrel and go over Niagara Falls" serve? Not much--except it "Falls" strives to rhyme with "Paul." Cliches: good die young and bad seemingly live indefinitely. walking a crooked or straight line. just the blind leading the blind. America doesn’t really want to give up any more of her pie. rage like a woodland fire. heavy weight off of my chest. borrow & beg. robbing Peter to pay Paul. barrel and go over Niagara Falls. You rely on the words of others. There is no freshness to what you say. A truly successful poet creates the cliches of tomorrow, not using those in existence as the main mode of expression. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Pshaw!!!
|
|
Exactly!!!!! No bearing in reality. WTF!!! We all have different realitys. We come from different places in life which makes for thousands of different writes!!! Ohhhh god I'm soooooo ****ing pissed off!!!!! I find it interesting that a woman who says on her profile, "I can be quite blunt at times" can be so ANGRY at someone who expresses an opinion. Why be angry? To be angry at someone online whom you have never met is a useless endeavor and wasted emotion. So you like that you like; if you want black velvet paintings of Elvis or matadors on your walls, that is your business! But when ANYONE posts in a public place, that person invites comments and critiques. I am not a "yes" person; I don't follow the crowd. I have, however, spent years learning how to read and dissect what makes poetry "work." To use hackneyed phrases, cliches, and old, tired imagery does not make for excellent poetry. Of course, to those who have not extensively studied literature do not have a grasp. If someone has not read Eliot's "Wasteland," "The Hollow Men," or even "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock," any poetry that rhymes might impress them. But your anger is misplaced and it is ineffective. The only person whom your anger is bothering--or to whom it is important--is you! Yeah, the guy who wrote the poem agrees with you, but he is a face and nickname online. Shrug. So much for living in "real" life, eh? |
|
|
|
Topic:
Pshaw!!!
|
|
"I accept critiques very well but you are just a bit mean, mis-informed and a tad self righteous to think you can know what somebody you DON"T KNOW is living/going through. In YOUR world of daisys & dew drops I suppose the reality you hold dearly must come with glitter and patchouli. Outside my door I can throw a rock twice and hit pimps, prostitutes,drug pushers & users.
My reality is based on FACT not fairy fiction" It doesn't matter what your reality is based upon! Toulouse Lautrec painted the underside of Paris life, yet HIS work is recognized as genius. It also doesn't matter what a person is going through; if bad experiences made good poetry, then a lot of poetry would be good. It is about the expression, the imagery, the creativity and originality in the poem. It is about the use of words and metaphor. If you want to read visceral, punch-you-in-the-gut poetry that works, try "Howl" by Ginsberg. It isn't about me being self-righteous or even judging YOU as a person (which is what you think that I am doing); it is about your poetry. |
|
|
|
Topic:
In the essance of desire.
|
|
People post their work so people will read it, no? What you see as "mean," I see as honesty. To sugarcoat criticism doesn't do the poet any good, nor does it do the writer of prose any good, either.
I rewrote the introduction to my MA thesis over 12 times because my thesis director said it wasn't good enough. I didn't argue, I didn't get mad, I didn't get my feelings hurt. To be able to take criticism is a part of being a writer, and if a writer cannot take criticism, then he/she shouldn't post in a public place! There is a standard for poetry--regardless of personal style. There is poor art, and there is good art. Good art lasts through the ages--ever heard of Shakespeare? There's a reason why you have. Ever heard of Colly Cibber? Bulwar Lytton? If you have, you are an English major or an aficionado of bad writing. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Chapel Perilous
|
|
You are where you want to be. If you are not moving on, it is your choice.
|
|
|
|
Topic:
In the essance of desire.
|
|
How long did it take you to find that many words that rhymed? Perhaps you should have taken that time to think about originality and true poetic style.
|
|
|
|
Topic:
This night/Tonite
|
|
Argh. The rhyme is forced and so repetitive, that the sentiment in this poem could be expressed in four lines.
|
|
|
|
The rhyming is so forced that it makes no sense. What the heck does causing pain have to do with the narrator liking rain?
Poetry should flow naturally; the words should not be used because you need to rhyme with the preceding line. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Pshaw!!!
|
|
Your poem is filled with cliches and stereotypes that have no bearing in reality. The good don't always die young and the evil do not live indefinitely.
Try making up your own imagery and metaphor instead of using old, worn-out pictures to paint your poetry. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Up a path from exile.
|
|
The imagery is forced. You are trying too hard to present clever metaphors which, in reality, fall flat. Many are trite and hackneyed.
|
|
|
|
Topic:
NEW BORN!
|
|
It is "their," possessive, not "there."
|
|
|
|
I am thinking how silly it is that there are 12 "parts" of people telling about what they are thinking "right now."
|
|
|
|
I am clueless why anyone would ask if another person panicked over losing a picture. Must have been a slow news day.
|
|
|