The Royal Wedding

12346

Comments

  • edited April 2011
    Dunny wrote: »
    "allowed". You come across as very jealous. They can't do a thing right in your eyes, yet they do so much not just for the image of our country but also to bring in a huge amount of wealth. You seem to resent that.

    Jealousy is when someone resents someone else purely because they have something that they want. An easy to understand (and common) example is one man hating another man because he fancies the other man's girlfriend.

    However, it is not jealousy if someone resents someone having something because they think they don't deserve it, or they think that person abuses it or misuses it or even if they think that person is of bad character and has done nothing to obtain something that other people of good character or who work harder do not obtain. You can argue that these opinions are wrong or ill-judged but it's incorrect to accuse them of jealousy.

    Here's an example of what I mean. There's a bunch of people in a bar and a man comes in, pushes he way through the punters rudely and then shoves his way to the front of the bar and gets served. Some people object, he turns to them and says "you're all just jealous of my physical superiority, self-confidence and go-getter attitude". Is people's dislike of this man really jealousy?
  • edited April 2011
    karingal wrote: »
    Who cares?

    Nothing is going to change...

    Meh. If we took that attitude we'd probably still be stuck with the divine right of kings.
  • edited April 2011
    Zagreb wrote: »

    Here's an example of what I mean. There's a bunch of people in a bar and a man comes in, pushes he way through the punters rudely and then shoves his way to the front of the bar and gets served. Some people object, he turns to them and says "you're all just jealous of my physical superiority, self-confidence and go-getter attitude". Is people's dislike of this man really jealousy?

    yeah they are jealous that he is getting served. :p
  • edited April 2011
    mile wrote: »
    yeah they are jealous that he is getting served. :p

    :-P

    But seriously, my point is that if the other punters were jealous of the pushy chap that means they all harbour a desire to be like them, push others out of the way and not give a damn if it upsets people. Odds are a few do think like that, but is it really the only reason people would object?

    Because "jealousy" is seen as wholly negative it can, like "racism" be deployed in political conversation in order to try and shut them down "well, you're just jealous", "well, you're just a racist" without having to bother with engaging with the subtleties of an argument.
  • edited April 2011
    Matt_B wrote: »
    Meh. If we took that attitude we'd probably still be stuck with the divine right of kings.
    Point being arguing on an 80's 8 bit computer forum isn't going help...
    I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
  • edited April 2011
    mile wrote: »
    yeah they are jealous that he is getting served. :p

    Yep somebody needs to smash a glass into his throat!!! Bring him down a peg or two :D
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited April 2011
    karingal wrote: »
    Point being arguing on an 80's 8 bit computer forum isn't going help...

    You never know!
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    You never know!
    I think we do...
    I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
  • edited April 2011
    Zagreb wrote: »
    :-P

    But seriously, my point is that if the other punters were jealous of the pushy chap that means they all harbour a desire to be like them, push others out of the way and not give a damn if it upsets people. Odds are a few do think like that, but is it really the only reason people would object?

    Because "jealousy" is seen as wholly negative it can, like "racism" be deployed in political conversation in order to try and shut them down "well, you're just jealous", "well, you're just a racist" without having to bother with engaging with the subtleties of an argument.

    well i don't think people would exactly want to push their way to the front of the line.

    but id like it if i walked in and everyone decided to let me get served first. and with that there would arrise jealousy.

    your just jealous of me anyway. :p
  • edited April 2011
    mile wrote: »
    well i don't think people would exactly want to push their way to the front of the line.

    but id like it if i walked in and everyone decided to let me get served first. and with that there would arrise jealousy.

    your just jealous of me anyway. :p

    You shouldn't start a sentence with and.
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    You shouldn't start a sentence with and.

    grammer person who had a distant relation once talk to hitler. :-P
  • edited April 2011
    mile wrote: »
    well i don't think people would exactly want to push their way to the front of the line.

    but id like it if i walked in and everyone decided to let me get served first. and with that there would arrise jealousy.

    your just jealous of me anyway. :p

    So does everyone, in the same way that everyone (well, most people) would like to be rich. But there's a difference in the way people will react to (say) someone who gets served first because they were first in the doors and fair-and-square got to the front of the queue and someone who uses their physical size and general disregard for others to force their way through.
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    You shouldn't start a sentence with and.

    Actually, isn't it the case that you can start a sentence with "And"? I'm sure I've seen it done in proper works of literature by authors that know how to use a semi-colon and everything.
  • edited April 2011
    Zagreb wrote: »
    So does everyone, in the same way that everyone (well, most people) would like to be rich. But there's a difference in the way people will react to (say) someone who gets served first because they were first in the doors and fair-and-square got to the front of the queue and someone who uses their physical size and general disregard for others to force their way through.

    if it was chuck norris, id say people were jealous. :p
  • edited April 2011
    Zagreb wrote: »
    Actually, isn't it the case that you can start a sentence with "And"? I'm sure I've seen it done in proper works of literature by authors that know how to use a semi-colon and everything.

    I have a perfectly working semi colon, i go to the loo twice a day. and believe me you can not start a sentence with and.
  • edited April 2011
    mile wrote: »
    if it was chuck norris, id say people were jealous. :p

    Chuck Norris wouldn't have to push people out of the way, the other punters would just flee well in advance.
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    I have a perfectly working semi colon, i go to the loo twice a day. and believe me you can not start a sentence with and.

    Tell that one to Shakespeare. He started rather a lot of sentences with "And" at any rate.
  • edited April 2011
    Matt_B wrote: »
    Tell that one to Shakespeare. He started rather a lot of sentences with "And" at any rate.

    Yep. The Bible has lots of sentences that begin with "and" too...
  • edited April 2011
    fog wrote: »
    thought I might as well.. as Mel likes em so much ;)

    Kate's sister scrubbed up well

    and Miles fav Elton was there :lol:

    actually those where 2 of the 3 things I noticed about the wedding:

    1) Who's the girl with the great ass?

    2) Hey, it's Elton John!

    3) Is that David Beckam or Ricky Gervais?
  • edited April 2011
    Matt_B wrote: »
    Tell that one to Shakespeare. He started rather a lot of sentences with "And" at any rate.

    Shakespeare! dont get me started on Shakespeare. Anyone that has to invent over 50 new words to write a play is rubbish in my book.
  • edited April 2011
    beanz wrote: »
    Your logic is flawed.

    The pot has $100 in it.

    The rich add nothing..there is still $100 in the pot
    The 'poor' take $100, there is nothing in the pot.

    No, it's not. The pot has $100 in it, the rich had a good bit of that pot spent on them in defence, police, fire service, roads, public transport etc. Just because they didn't directly dip their hands into the pot and take it, doesn't mean it wasn't spent for their benefit, and if that infrastructure were to go away they wouldn't remain rich for much longer. And they have rather a lot to lose, too, if the infrastructure that protects their wealth goes away. Even the poster-child for the hard right (Ayn Rand) needed the social safety net (and voluntarily used it!) in the end.
    Your definition relies on the fact the rich do not contribute

    Actually I said nothing of the sort, I was merely pointing out that not contributing when you take advantage of the infrastructure was in fact leeching. I never even insinuated that there was a single person who doesn't contribute, and I well know the majority of the rich *do* contribute.
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    Shakespeare! dont get me started on Shakespeare. Anyone that has to invent over 50 new words to write a play is rubbish in my book.

    Holy fustigatorings thou ist talking absolute roobleshins ;)
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited April 2011
    1980-20.. wrote: »
    Shakespeare! dont get me started on Shakespeare. Anyone that has to invent over 50 new words to write a play is rubbish in my book.

    The odd thing is that I can understand women in Madrid with a lot more ease than I can understand a Shakespeare comedy...
  • edited April 2011
    Holy fustigatorings thou ist talking absolute roobleshins ;)

    Roobleshins! im having that one for me sen.
  • edited April 2011
    fogartylee wrote: »
    My family have been interbred for generations too. We used to favour Hovis, but now we like Warburtons more
    bah-dum tshhhh...:-)
  • edited April 2011
    fogartylee wrote: »
    My family have been interbred for generations too. We used to favour Hovis, but now we like Warburtons more

    Whatever happened to Mighty White?

    Is it racist now? :lol:
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited April 2011
    Zagreb wrote: »
    Actually, isn't it the case that you can start a sentence with "And"? I'm sure I've seen it done in proper works of literature by authors that know how to use a semi-colon and everything.

    "And did those feet in ancient time..." - apparently they were singing that just the other day at some wedding or other.
  • edited April 2011
    Whatever happened to Mighty White?

    Is it racist now? :lol:
    i prefer danish
    Professional Mel-the-Bell Simulator................"So realistic, I found myself reaching for the Kleenex King-Size!" - Richard Darling
  • edited April 2011
    Whatever happened to Mighty White?

    Is it racist now? :lol:

    In retrospect, now that you mention it, it does sound a bit like a name of a supremacist group, or something to that degree... ;)
  • edited April 2011
    i prefer danish

    Yeah we know but what type of bread?


    (I think the forums might finally be getting back on track)
Sign In or Register to comment.