Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
BerryBelinda
Over 90 days ago
Bisexual Female, 55
UK

Forum

Quote by TheLovelyOne
My daughter knew about it from age three because a lovely lesbian couple live across the road and a couple of dear and gay family friends have been together for 30 years - it was as natural as the seasons.

I think young children learning about homosexuality in its natural setting - like in this case - is fine. Obviously many kids are going to see this happening - above all those whose parents are in a same-sex relationship. I just have a problem with it being taught in primary school. Let the parents who wish their children to know be the ones to teach them.
Quote by kentswingers777
Whatever happened to hop scotch? lol :lol:

I think that was phased out when calculators and computers were allowed in....
biggrin
I've been following this thread with interest, and it's plain to see that some people have completely missed the point. That children are no longer allowed to remain innocent.
Teaching homosexuality to 5 or 6 year olds is just plain wrong. I didn't know what sex was until about 9 - and that was through an older girl friend. My parents/school didn't touch on this until early teens.
(Drugs were never discussed/used/seen, and I only found out about these once I had left school altogether)
Why should we teach little ones who are barely past toddler stage that some men sleep together, and some women get married.... why???
Surely they can find this out for themselves once they discover about sex in general? Formulate opinions then, once their brains have developed more? I would be furious if my child were taught this stuff in school and would be sorely tempted to teach them at home. At least then my child would remain a child until it was ready to know about adult stuff. It has enough years in which to be an adult. How can a child form an opinion about this kind of thing when he doesn't even know what his own willy is for? (At least, he shouldn't, until he needs to start using it).
Never did me any harm. The kids whose 'home lives may be reflected in those relationships' will learn about it anyway - at home.
Maybe it's a generation thing. Maybe the world just decided to abolish childhood while I wasn't looking.
I don't take any notice of what the big supermarkets choose to tell me and like others, use common sense to tell if something is edible or not. I frequently buy close-to-sell-by bargains and am not scared of eating certain things that others would run away from. I am rarely ill, and if I am, it is never from something I've eaten.
Admittedly, I won't eat fish or meat that looks or smells old - but it's not difficult to tell, if it starts off fresh and I know what colour it should look.
This thread does make me think about the way we waste so much food though, when so many would literally kill to have such well stocked fridges as ours. Millions don't even have a fridge at all.
We are all suckers to the bright lights of the supermarkets and I believe most of us probably buy far too much than we can actually eat. Simply because we can. A day-old yoghurt or sad-looking chicken leg could keep a child alive in Ethiopia. Makes you think, doesn't it?
Quote by X_fanny_x
1 very energetic 9 year old monkey who bounces of walls free to good home (or even a not so good home) will do

Is this a real monkey? Just wondering, because if so, I find it very disturbing that you don't care what happens to your pet once it is out of your hands. Especially given its age.
Why do people think it is okay to just give pets away when thay are tired of them... you see it happen so much. Why get it in the first place? Surely it is wrong to tell your child it's okay to swap the hamster she is bored with for an alternative pet. Surely one of the main points of giving children pets is so that they learn responibility? What example are we setting them?
Sorry if I offend anyone but it offends me that some choose to treat animals like insensitive possessions. They are living creatures with feelings, and we are responsible for their welfare the minute we decide to have them live in our homes. They're not stuffed toys that we can give to OXFAM when they are no longer fun.
Quote by Sassy-Seren
a non swinging member of the bored sex life society rotflmao

Sassy, I appreciate you're making a joke, but I must stress that not all vanillas are bored with their sex life...............in fact, mine is heaps better since I stopped meeting swingers......... rolleyes
Quote by
I celebrate a festival marking the return of the sun. Not for any reason other than it is nice to kick up my heels when it is dark and damp.

I like that Travis. (But where's the sun?? cool)
I do think we should all celebrate at the end of the year, in whichever way we choose - and regardless of our religion.
Religious traditions are all well and good but it seems to me that we only pick the bits of it that suit us. I wonder how many genuine, practising, church-going Christians and Catholics are there in this multi-cultural Britain? If we had one big, non-religious holiday, no one would get accused of being racist, and no one would feel left out.
Quote by Heaven1970
this country wont be our country for much longer, its becoming a joke, we have to have a feastive holiday not a xmas holiday, it wont be long before we stop celebrating xmas altogether

I've been reading this thread with interest, especially as I think the thread starter is wrong to accuse his colleague of being racist. The racist one is the one who doesn't respect another's religion....
But anyway. The above comment spurred me to post.
How many of you actually celebrate Christmas for what it is? How many go to Midnight Mass? How many 'spare a thought for Jesus'? How many just go all out to be as festive (ie: over-indulgent) as you possibly can? How many of you are sucked in by the outrageous commercialism surrounding the last week of the year, by lining retailers' pockets and spending far too much money on food and alcohol and presents with which to spoil your materialistic children and families?
I'm not saying we should ban Christmas, but I think we should accept that not all people living here choose to celebrate the birth of someone they may not believe in. In the States it is seen as a festive season, and people just say 'Happy Holidays'. Does it matter if 'Christ' isn't mentioned? Would that honestly affect how much turkey and trimmings we can stuff in our faces?
Christmas / Holiday Season will never be banned. The government makes too much money in taxes from the incredible amount of money we spend on our sickening over indulgence to ever stop it. So maybe they will change the name.... would you really, honestly, truly care, if you could still spend a few days with your family?
Quote by Dread
most of them, lets face it, are like me, saddo married guys who find it very difficult to type with one hand smile. Seriously though, there is, understandably, a degree of hostility levelled at us a a whole although as usual it's the minority of nut cases that give the rest of us a bad name for being time wasters, pests, wankers (hold my hand up to that one.......ooops, not now) and generally a bloody nuisance bombarding couples and singles with one liners (I'm not holding my hand up to that one) and failing to show up etc. (nor that one).
I would guess that the fact that I have to let anyone I do make contact with that I am married and cheating but that my wife wouldnt understand puts people off as its again a bit of a saddo thing to say and sounds realy lame. I know my wife doesnt understand as I have broached the subject of swinging on a number of occassions and she's just not interested, and sadly, our sex life isn't up to much.
Now if I came onto a forum and spouted all that I don't suppose I would be very welcome therefore I generally lurk.........with one hand.

Good post. :thumbup:
I lurk because I like reading quality posts like this. It's people like DaveJ and Dirtydoggers that keep me reading.
While I'm temporarily de-lurking, may I wish everyone a Merry Christmas. Don't stuff too many turkeys. xxx
Quote by da69ve

there are people on here who, by throwing about personal comments, accusations and the whole……act in a bullish way.

Of course De Sade would never do anything like that would you De Sade? wink
Nice to see you're not getting personal, Da69ve.....the wink don't fool me.
Also good to see you contributing constructively to a good thread - better than some of the trite that's been around of late.....but then maybe debate is not your strong point.
wink wink.
Scandal -
worship
It's Petal I feel sorry for. All she wanted was some advice. Guess she didn't bank on coming up against the morality police, otherwise known as the holier-than-thou brigade.
It gets tiring after a while...........
Hey dammie - you're one of the very few people I like to congratulate on being another year older.....
hope you have a wicked day me dear. kiss
Quote by WorcesterFun
No:
"Gosh what a great night"
"Thanks to everyone who made it along"
"120 couples can't be wrong"
or anything similar.

Quote by Freckledbird
The nature of the thank you comments they described, led me to believe they might be referring to munch thank you's as well, ie. "Thanks to everyone who made it along"/
"120 couples can't be wrong"

Now you're just twisting things FB, to get out of a hole.
They said they have seen no examples of "Thanks to everyone who made it along"/
"120 couples can't be wrong" in LMU - they are giving examples of what they would like to see in LMU - they are not referring to munches at all.
And...'thank you's'? I'm surprised at you. ... :shock:
Quote by Freckledbird
Personally we find most sites, and especially this forum, lacks two of the politest and friendliest words you can use in the english language. THANK YOU.
The forum is called Lets Meet Up, and is all about arranging meets. Look at the list, 1000's of messages arranging stuff all over the UK. The event takes place, and then nothing!
No:
"Gosh what a great night"
"Thanks to everyone who made it along"
"120 couples can't be wrong"
or anything similar.
Discretion, yes, but good manners with a follow up can't be seen as wrong surely?
WC

You've never noticed the 'thank you' threads in the Cafe then? They are usually, if not always, posted to thank the organisers of a munch or social.
I think the point is that not many say thank you in Lets Meet Up - and look what happens when they do. confused
Not everyone goes into the Cafe, FB. The post refers to the LMU Forum.
And thanking people for munches is not the same as thanking people for turning up to a meet. Not the same at all.
Quote by ToshUK
Essex young gun, people masturbate at all sorts of rates depending on their sex drive. If your cock is getting sore use some lubricant and wash it well to avoid inflammations and infections. Keep up your zinc and selenium intake as well, for instance eating brazil nuts or pumpkin nuts. Men get far more stick for masturbating than women do but we all do it.

I think this is more what young gun was after...... nowt wrong with a bit of friendly advice.... wink
Quote by Freckledbird

There is the slight possibility (given the little smiley face at the end of her post) that Kiss_Me may have meant this in a light hearted manner. Also, and again forgive me for misinterpritation, but she may not know what 21-year-old boys are like. Far be it from me to assume though.
H.x

Agreed.
I realise KM was being sarcastic in her first post but it still smacks of pots and kettles. KM's next post, where she says she can't see the point in it, is no joke.
It just seems to me that the people who are no very well known get given a hard time, and he was asking a valid question, in my opinion.
Surely everyone knows what 21-year-old boys are like - gay or straight. Unless they live in a hole...... rolleyes
Quote by Kiss_Me
How do you find the time? dunno

That's a bit of an odd/unfair question when you consider:
Essex_Young_Gun: Joined June 05 - 68 posts
Kiss_Me: Joined May 06 - 2264 posts
How do you find the time to post so much in 3 months ?
And to say you don't see the point in his doing it so often is an even odder comment, considering the nature of the site, and knowing what 21-year-old boys are like.
Quote by da69ve
terrorist's only solution to peace in the mddle east is to wipe Israel from the face of the earth....not something Israel could really sit down and talk about at the negoiating table is it!

OMG! Is that what terrorists are really after? All of them, wherever they are in the world, whatever faith and cultural group they represent, they are basically out to obliterate Israel? Now there's a thought I hadn't thought of before!
Tania.......are you trying to be witty?
I'd stick to your fantasy world if i was you!
And why is Tania in a fantasy world? Because she disagrees with YOU?
Quote by da69ve
There are countries that would like to see Israel obliterated even long before their war with Lebanon.....Israel will never be able to talk even if they found peace with Palestine, to these countries,they just don't want to know....Does Israel have the right to defend its self by whatever means nessessary?

Of course it doesn't. If that was aimed at me (because I admitted I am Jewish), then let me state quite clearly that I am against what they are doing to Lebanon. All war is wrong - I am not hypocritical enough to support them because i share their religion.
Quote by da69ve
So is terrorism.......but you seemed to forget that.......when you say we go an attack their people....who is their people?........other terroists?......

I'm not sure I understand your question - can you try writing in proper English?
I never said terrorism was right.
Who do YOU think the terrorists are, Dave? Who do YOU think they are fighting for? Surely their people are the people we choose to bomb on a daily basis? Or do you fail to see the connection?
Quote by Jon
Sit back and take it - yeah fucking right, let any terrorist organisation from PETA to Al Qada do as they wish - how many dead and maimed do you want the population to suffer before we do anything about it?

Well I'm sorry you feel so strongly about my posts.
How many dead and maimed have we caused other populations? How is it okay for us to kill, and yet terrorists must not - and MUST be stopped? Who will stop US, as a nation?
Of course the Army is there to protect me and my fellow citizens, and without their existence I may not exist, being a Jew. At no point have I said they shouldn't exist.
However, my point was that I fail to see why I should praise what they are doing in the Middle East, if I disagree with the war they are fighting.
Terrorists will attack us as long as we attack their people. Or are we arrogant enough to think we have a right to harm their people, but not the other way round? If we pull out of the war they may or may not continue to target us - but at least we would not be provoking them.
We should advocate peace - not war. That's not saying abolish the Army - it has to exist to defend us - but not necessarily to go out and attack. Terrorists are not full-blown armies. Terrorists don’t send tanks and bomber planes and warships, killing thousands and devastating whole societies.
I repeat what has been said already - how can we condone war and yet condemn terrorists? It all amounts to the same thing : loss of innocent lives.
I don't pretend to know everything - or to have all the facts, figures, statistics, etc. But I do know that whatever way you look at it, war is wrong, and if we kill, then we must expect to be killed. The only way to stop the killing is to stop doing it ourselves.
Quote by Jags
I'm still watching and consider the word 'warmonger' abusive in its perjorative form.
rolleyes

I apologise for my 'definition'. I mean that he is pro-war, where I am anti.
Quote by PoloLady
I am struggling to see how you could write that.
These people didn't sign up just to go and kick some ass in a sandy country. They signed up to protect you - so you too could be safe and sound and very comfortable.
Are you trying to imply we should have no armed forces?
After all if they are no valid reasons for us to be involved in any war - why do we need them?
Would you feel comfortable if the Army was scrapped?

No of course I would not feel happy if the Army was scrapped, but I don't see why I should take Dave's advice and praise the soldiers, when I don't agree with this particular war they are involved in. I don't believe in war fullstop. There must be another way - but as long as the world is armed, and power-hungry men are in possession of these arms, war will continue, and there is little I can do about it, unfortunately.
If the soldiers refused to fight in the Middle East, we wouldn't be able to get involved, and some other country would have to follow Bush around in his search for oil and power.
I care not if I am the only one here who thinks this Middle East war is wrong. I have my opinions, others have theirs.
All I want is peace, and a clear conscience. How can I be proud to be British when our Army is out there fighting power-hungry wars, and when we have more than a whole lot of other people in the world.? Can we not just take a back seat and let others fight?
Quote by da69ve
every single Jew would have been wiped off the face of the earth!......how easily some people forget!

I never forget Dave.
But how is fighting more wars making things any better?
Quote by PoloLady

How would you feel if the UK Government decided to make us all sign up to fight? Would you be happy for your children to be given guns and sent to fight - in the name of peace - - because some terrorists dared to attack our green and pleasant lands?

We could take that stance - I woulder what would have happened if we as a nation had taken that stance in 1939?
WW2 is another story. One we should have learned from - that war is ugly.
The question was directed specifically at Da69ve - who has two sons. I wondered how much of a warmonger he would be if his kids were forced to go to fight tomorrow.
Quote by da69ve
How many innocent people have the British Armed Forces killed this year alone, I wonder, in the name of peace?

Not as many as Saddam had already killed in the name of power!
So we are back to square one. It's okay for us to kill, but not okay for others....
If we are killing in the name of peace, how is that any better than in the name of power? How is it going to make the terrorists stop trying to attack us? Killing is killing - war is war. We should leave well alone and let others fight Bush's battles. Our country has enough problems without making more, and pissing a whole lot of people off in the process.
Quote by da69ve
So we just stand back and take it.......

That would be more honourable and dignified than going in all guns blazing, yes. And a whole lot safer for our nation, in the long run.
If we fight back, we are as bad as the terrorists, if not worse - 67 killed in the Twin Towers? How many innocent people have the British Armed Forces killed this year alone, I wonder, in the name of peace?
How many children in this country have been bombed this year?
How would you feel if the UK Government decided to make us all sign up to fight? Would you be happy for your children to be given guns and sent to fight - in the name of peace - - because some terrorists dared to attack our green and pleasant lands?
Quote by da69ve
[
maybe......because there was British Citizens in the Towers at the time......just like there was alot of other nationalities in the Towers at the time along with US Citizens!
for the record....67 British citizens died in that attack of the world trade centre....more than on 7/7.

So therefore we are justified in going over to bomb the living daylights out of innocent Afghanis, whilst 'searching for Bin Laden'?
How many other countries went in search of revenge, because some of theIr citizens were murdered in the towers?
TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT - AND NEVER WILL
Quote by Scandal
For me, there is no distinction between the consequences of individual suicide bombers and those who fly planes carpet bombing everything below them.

For me neither.
How come some condone war on the Middle East, and yet condemn individual (relatively speaking) terrorists? We do a whole lot more damage than they do, when you think about it, and principally to innocent people.
And for the record DB, yes, Twin Towers was blown up - but how come the UK had to immediately jump onto the terrorist hunt with Bush when at the time they hadn't targeted UK?
What happened once we did?
How many other peaceful countries follow Bush into the Middle East?
Why do we have to provoke these terrorists?
I don't knock the security system - just the fact that we have to fight the US' wars, and therefore put ourselves at a lot more risk than we need to. The world is a sick enough place without putting ourselves on the firing line.
No one should take any of these comments personally - it is a healthy (IMHO) debate about things that, at the end of the day, we have little control over.
Politics will always divide people - and this thread highlights the fact. If we can't speak out here, where else can we? Surely no one expects MPs to be listening? Surely we should be able to voice our opinions, educated or not? Surely by reading others' opinions, we are more informed?
Some think the terrorists are wrong - some think they have a point - some think we should pretend none of it is happening and carry on enjoying our lives of opulence and luxury, outraged that terrorists seek to disrupt our holiday plans. (This is a general comment - not aimed at ANYONE). I wonder how many Iraqis or Afghans have the time/means/inclination to sit and chat on a swingers' site all day.
Quote by Tania
I'd rather live a more measured (moderate) life with a few more hardships and have world peace than bask in the riches of Britain (or America or whatever country) and ignore the people dying in other parts of the world every day due to our actions/lack of action. As for businesses folding, prices rising, hospitals closing... surely you are not talking about the Thatcher era?

I hate to say it but I agree with Tania here (sorry Tania - I don't usually agree with all you say confused).
Whilst we are busy enjoying the luxury of a rich country, 'following in US' footsteps', we are justifiably being targeted by terrorists who are probably quite narked that we are fighting them because we have something they don't.
Why else would we be in Iraq and Afghanistan? Let's not pretend that it's not for their oil or poppies. They're worth millions and the Big Fish know it.
Prices are rising anyway. Our education/health/inflation is a nightmare - mmmm - could it be that we are spending too much on wars in countries that have never started a war with us? We went in because the US did. Like ignorant sheep we follow Bush and murder thousands. Do they come over here and bomb us? No. So they send in the terrorists, because what else can they do?
What has the US done to cut down its oil needs? It has refused to cooperate and is the largest consumer of oil - it refuses to back down, needs more an more oil, wants our full support, and then we all get heated because the 'other side' gets angry and seeks to retaliate.
All I'm saying is that we should back out of wars that are really no concern of ours - okay some may disagree with that - but fighting in the Middle East is hardly going to stop the terrorists is it? Quite the opposite.
Loads of countries have unstable, unjust regimes. Have we bombed Zimbabwe? NO. Because they don't have anything we want.
I would be quite happy to live a less consumerist lifestyle - in fact I do try to - perhaps we should learn that being as fat and rich as we are is going to cost us something, and that if we value our lives, we should value theirs.