Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Tarot. I have two kids of my own and I regularly treat youngsters as part of my profession. There is nothing YOU can teach me about child psychology.


Did I miss something, when as an undergraduate, I read all that research into sexuality and prenatal hormonal chemistry? And what about all the research into human neurobehavioral development?


Tarot, if you can find me just one credible research paper providing a link between exposure to gay characters in soaps and development of sexual orientation, then I promise to stop treating you like a muppet.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BTW Louisa... I knew you wouldn't stay away

> forever, but two weeks? Where's your willpower?



Jeremy I just couldn't resist, I was sat on my sun lounger sulking. And I knew deep down, admin wasn't prepared to budge. So I've come back with my bottle of Pinot between my legs, so to speak.


Louisa.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tarot. I have two kids of my own and I regularly

> treat youngsters as part of my profession. There

> is nothing YOU can teach me about child

> psychology.

>

> Did I miss something, when as an undergraduate, I

> read all that research into sexuality and prenatal

> hormonal chemistry? And what about all the

> research into human neurobehavioral development?

>

> Tarot, if you can find me just one credible

> research paper providing a link between exposure

> to gay characters in soaps and development of

> sexual orientation, then I promise to stop

> treating you like a muppet.


What an odd thing to say blah blah. I cannot think of many child psychologists who would engage with a poster like tarot in such a way esp to the extent of asking them to provide a credible research paper (which we all know is futile).

That's right Jeremy. I'm not going to say exactly what I do for a profession in a public forum. Why would I?


Not an odd thing to say at all numbers. Tarot is being deliberately obtuse and trying to avoid taking responsibility for his/ her comments. I don't have to be polite about that, esp as all prior posts that try to reason with Tarot have been so deliberately ignored.


lol@spark67 Phil Mitchell? Really? :D

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think bb is claiming to be a child

> psychologist per se... just someone who knows a

> little bit about it.


Er...really? When someone on an internet forum makes claims that cannot be verified, "that there is nothing you can teach them about ...[insert brainy subject]", that seems a little more than someone saying they know a bit about it. Compounded by the implication that the subject at hand is part of their profession.


Anyway, there's NOTHING you can teach me about thermonuclear dynamics. Not that its anything to do with my work you understand.

Point taken numbers, but I think most people would agree that someone starting a thread and then extending on their subject with comments like watershed and impact on children, better be able to back that up with hard evidence. In spite of being challenged on that point by me in several posts, Tarot has chosen to not only ignore it, but then further insults all of our intelligence by claiming to be a victim of heterophobia! He/ she further responds to me with a comment about not having children etc.


Anyone looking at the post you are now trying to pick apart (from me) and looking at the post I was replying to, in context, would be able to see why Tarot deserved the talking down he got.


If Tarot knew anything about sexuality and psychology, he/ she would never have made the comemment about watersheds in the first place.

I am the only hetro in the village. L.O.L

You have all missed the point of the original post.

I make no excuses about anything, there is not one person this thread was aimed at but a question on the content of the t.v soaps.

Its you lot that got your knickers in a twist I HAVENT threatened anyone with being buried alive or run over by a gay car all disguised threats that true trolls make. By the way stop brow beating people to your way of thinking its not always about you.

Tarot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am the only hetro in the village. L.O.L

> You have all missed the point of the original

> post.

> I make no excuses about anything, there is not one

> person this thread was aimed at but a question on

> the content of the t.v soaps.

> Its you lot that got your knickers in a twist I

> HAVENT threatened anyone with being buried alive

> or run over by a gay car all disguised threats

> that true trolls make. By the way stop brow

> beating people to your way of thinking its not

> always about you.


Hey Tarot


I think I first mentioned being buried alive because it's

the only story line I remember other than Nick Cotton and

dirty Den. :)


I think if you said you didn't like any sexual scenes before

the watershed (rather than just gay ones) you'd get some

support (I remember leaving the room as a teenager).

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Point taken numbers, but I think most people would

> agree that someone starting a thread and then

> extending on their subject with comments like

> watershed and impact on children, better be able

> to back that up with hard evidence. In spite of

> being challenged on that point by me in several

> posts, Tarot has chosen to not only ignore it, but

> then further insults all of our intelligence by

> claiming to be a victim of heterophobia! He/ she

> further responds to me with a comment about not

> having children etc.

>

> Anyone looking at the post you are now trying to

> pick apart (from me) and looking at the post I was

> replying to, in context, would be able to see why

> Tarot deserved the talking down he got.

>

> If Tarot knew anything about sexuality and

> psychology, he/ she would never have made the

> comemment about watersheds in the first place.


Haven't you worked out that trying to reason with someone with such views they started a thread about it is pointless?


Oh do forgive me, you're new here aren't you?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Doesn’t seem that simple   according to fullfact that’s a net figure   ” The £21.9 billion was a net figure. Gross additional pressures totalling £35.3 billion were identified by the Treasury, and approximately £13.4 billion of these pressures were then offset by a combination of reserve funds and other allowances. The additional pressures identified were as follows: 2024-25 public sector pay awards (£9.4bn) ”   I don’t think Labour have set expectation that changing government cures all the ills. In fact some people on here criticise them for saying exactly opposite “vote for us we’re not them but nothing will change because global issues”   I think they are too cautious across many areas. They could have been more explicit before election but such is the countries media and electorate that if they were we would now be stuck with sunak/badenoch/someone else with the 14 years of baggage of their government and infighting  the broad strokes of this government are essentially along right lines  also loving ckarkson today “ Clarkson: Your claim that I bought a farm to avoid taxes is false and irresponsible.  BBC: It’s your own claim.  Clarkson: What’s that got to do with anything?” and by loving I mean “loathing as much as I ever have”    
    • BBC and the IFS https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e12j4gz0o From BBC Verify:   Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank said Reeves "may be overegging the £22bn black hole". What about the rest of the £22bn? The government published a breakdown, external of how it had got from the Treasury's £9.5bn shortfall in February to the £22bn "black hole". It said that there was another £7bn between February and the actual Budget in March, as departments found out about new spending pressures and the government spent more on the NHS and the Household Support Fund There was a final £5.6bn between then and late July, which includes almost a month when Labour was in power. That was largely caused by increases in public sector pay. It was the Labour government that accepted the recommendations of the Pay Review Bodies (PRBs), but they said that the previous government should have budgeted for more than a 2% increase in public sector pay. Prof Stephen Millard from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research think tank told BBC Verify: "The 'political' question is whether you would count this as part of the fiscal black hole or not. If you do, then you get to the £22bn figure; if not, then you’re left with around £12.5bn to £13.5bn." It isn't this at all. When you run on an agenda of change and cleaning up politics and you put all of the eggs of despair in a basket at the door of the previous government you better hope you have a long honeymoon period to give you time to deliver the change you have promised. Look at the NHS, before the election it was all...it's broken because of 14 years of Tory incompetence and the implication was that Labour could fix is quickly. Then Wes Streeting (who is one of the smarter political cabinet members and is clearly able to play the long game) started talking about the need to change the NHS before the election - he talked about privatising parts of it (much to the annoyance of the left). He was being pragmatic because the only magic wand that is going to fix the NHS is massive reform - it's broken and has been for decades and throwing money at it has just papered over the cracks. Now Labour talk about the NHS needing 10 years of healing for there to be real difference and people are saying....what..... Words in opposition are easy; actions in government are a lot harder and I fear that given the structural issues caused by Covid, the energy crisis, the war in Ukraine (and now maybe a massive US/China trade war if Trump isn't bluffing) that we are heading to constant one-term governments. I don't think there was a government (and correct me if I am wrong) that survived Covid and in a lot of countries since Covid they have had regular government change (I think what is playing out in the US with them voting Trump in is reflective of the challenges all countries face). Labour massively over-egged the 14 years of hurt (who could blame them) but it is going to make things a lot tougher for them as they have set the expectation that changing government cures all the ills and as we have seen in the first 90 days of their tenure that is very much not the case. Completely agree but the big risk if Farage. If Labour don't deliver what they promised or hit "working people" then the populists win - it's happening everywhere. Dangerous, dangerous times ahead and Labour have to get it right - for all our sakes - no matter what party we support. P.S. Lammy is also one of the better Labour front-bench folks - he just is suffering from Labour's inability to think far enough ahead to realise that some posts might come back to haunt you...but in his defence did anyone really think Americans would be daft enough to vote him in again....;-)
    • My cat has been missing since Sunday evening 17th November he is British short hair male cat colour black with grey stripes. medium to large in size. He is easily identified by a large tooth missing on the top left of his mouth.  He lives in Upland Road just near the roundabout at Underhill Road. His name is Jack but he  only answers to Puss Puss please call me on 0208 299 2275 if you see him.   thank you Linda  
    • I think this could go on endlessly, so I suggest we finish it here!  But why don't you  track down the makers of the sign? Which hopefully has amused a lot of people, as well as brightening my bus journey. Tell  them that their directions to Dulwich are not only wrong, but they do not seem to know where the "real" Dulwich is 🤣 I'm sure they will be delighted 🤣  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...