a kas ir ar viņas vecumu? viņai 12 vai 60?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

tu vari iet pie martcores piedalīties viktorīnā :)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

es liktu uz divdesmit viducīti (un tiešām ceru, ka viņai ir 12 vai 60, lai būtu bijis vērts tagad iet gūglēt) :D

(Reply to this) (Parent)

es devu 25 (un pēc tam aizgāju gūglēt).

man viena cibiņa, kura izskatās stabilus 10-12 gadus jaunāka par savu vecumu (lielāku, nekā šai dāmai), reiz (pareizāk sakot, divas reizes, kad esmu viņu satikusi) šokēja vairāk.

music, gender and social media man patiks gan. interesanta sakritība, man tieši kāds nesen jautāja, vai man patīk chvrches un ļoti brīnījās, ka nē, ne pārāk [pārāk čiepstošs tas vokāliņš].

un piedur, ka par manu vienaudzi saka, ka omg, TIK VECA?! thanks, guys :))

(Reply to this) (Thread)

man nav sevišķu jūtu pret chvrches muzonu, bet zaķis ļ. iepatikās tīri off-stage. reku arī viņas slavenais guardian raksts: http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2013/sep/30/chvrches-lauren-mayberry-online-misogyny

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

pēc gadiem pieciem viņa būs kā jūsu deivids gahans
viss uz to iet
atliek tikai sākt lietot vielas un pievērsties aukstākajiem spēkiem

(Reply to this) (Parent)

jājā, pareizi visu saka, raksts patika labāk par interviju, jo intervijā intraverts intervēja intravertu un tur visiem miklas ķepiņas, var redzēt :)

nākamreiz lai gārdianam uzraksta nafig viņu vienīgo bildē safotošopējuši līdz nemaņai, smuka taču arī tāpat :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

es starp cit no izskata dotu tev kādus 23.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

paldies, man gan liekas, ka bildes ir bildes, bet dzīvajā esmu normāls pieaugušais :)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

nu nezinu nezinu...:))

(Reply to this) (Parent)

The free speech is a fundamental human right (in some constitutions and similar legal systems.)

Although covered by the very same fundamental right calling someone a prick is a personal opinion; remember a lot of people will recognize the word as coarse slang for a contemptible person. The prick to which you refer may have a fungal infection, jock itch, of the groin and upper thighs. Lesions caused by jock itch can extend from the crease between the inner thigh and pelvis, over the adjacent upper inner thigh, and into the anal area. Did you mean to call someone that? I hope not.

So, don't let's carry on with mixing fundamental rights with deprecatory remarks which refer to male anatomy.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

if it makes you feel any better, the word i'd use is "asshole", but then again, i'm not a scottish girl

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

It seems that you prefer to rely on “how do I feel about this or that” subjectivity.
This is a quiet misguided approach to the subject of free speech (and similar ones as well.) “Feeling stuff/realities” are more for a therapist’s office.
Anyway if you really want a bit more balanced approach try to use word “cunt” along with “prick.”

Now if you have objections to these thoughts - if you want to expose a flaw in my logic or express how do you feel about these issues or whatever else - the right of free speech allows you to do so. Not being a prick or a cunt.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

can't really find a point in there. sure we can discuss the relation of freedom of speech and freedom of hate speech if you like, but asking me to answer for a quote by someone else is a bit too much, isn't it?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

merci - this clarifies the matter for me

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

monsieur, did you watch the video?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Should I do it??

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

as you wish. however, if you're into discussing its content with me, watching it first would be appreciated. at least you'd know where the quote came from.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

ok
Assuming that I didn't watch the video is a really nice of you.
I was more curious were you stand on this. There were no comments on the quotation and every commentator including you seemed fine with it. Also, there was nothing except intro text about the rest. Now if I would prefer to discuss this with the young lady, you were advertising - well - I'd do that via different channel. According to her, she doesn't ignore even "negative comments." But I highly doubt she is participating in klab.lv environment, isn’t she?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

as i said, i personally would say asshole. exactly because we all have one, and we all shouldn't be one.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

yes you said ‘asshole’ alright
I’m not sure how well you now the language, but context-wise “prick” & “dick,” your favorite “asshole,” essential British choad “wanker,” shithead or even “pussy” all are derogatory names used for one particular gender. Add to this “kā arī iespēja no asprātīgas un mazliet kautrīgas dāmas nesāpīgi uzzināt, kas ir feminisms” and you’ve already established what kind of advocacy this is all about.
The same goes about free speech. Sure you can mix/play (with) it with ‘freedom of hate speech’ but it shows how someone understands the concept of one fundamental human right. I’ll skip going deeper into how it (legally) differs from … (it’s gonna take too long + I’m not sure about getting another “you’ve lost me”)

in shorty-short: Should hate speech be discouraged? Sure. And it’s always much easier to defend someone’s right to say something with which you agree or /and share the same point of view. But, you also have a duty (if we are talking about free society) to defend speech to which you may strongly object.
… … …

+ Scots are tough people. Well, maybe not all of them.

regarding “to answer for a quote by someone else is a bit too much” in particular and the whole thing as it is:

Normally, quotations should support someone's point, evidence, or giving examples or illustrating etc .
Normally, it should not repeat information or disagree with your point.
Normally.
And there was no any other explanation where you stand on this particular video/matter/case.
So I made an assumption that you share the same point of view.
To be sure, I needed a clarification.
I got it from you.
Hence merci.

finishing this (yea - you can safely call it a rant) :

there is a bright side in this conversation - it is highly unlikely that I’ll make another attempt
to clarify your position on your own posts

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

ok, now i realize you're not talking about the use of words for male or female genitalia as swearwords and the choices we make of those, which is a subject i'd find quite interesting. instead you're concentrating on any derogatory terms aimed at males. is that relevant here? i disagree asshole is only used for males. the thing is, swearwords are aimed at both sexes, and they revolve around two functions – the sexual and the excretory. i'd say the sexual swearwords are gender specific, while the excretory ones are gender neutral and thus preferable. it's a broad generalization, of course, but should give you an idea of my attitude. if you ever wanted one, of course.

(Reply to this) (Parent)