Break

I did shrink all of these quite a lot, so apologies for not-so-great quality. The one called "backstreets" was taken somewhere in Tunisia, can't remember the town, but I felt like a complete tourist and then saw this person walking their kid down a gritty back street; I thought that it would make a nice picture. I also took "mrs gren" (don't ask, I don't even know why lol) in Tunisia at some Roman ruins. I think I framed it nicely. This photo is odd actually because it looks a bit like a painting. "faceee" is a photo of my ex. I keep meaning to delete photos like this, although I do think this particular one is a good close-up. I am not a fan of posed photographs, and I prefer to take a picture of people doing their thing. Again, taken in Tunisia, is "el_jem" - It's of a Roman colesseum (I can't spell that word!) at a place called El Jem. I thought the light was just right on this day and I went completely snap-happy. And, uh.. my camera is a something something. I'll check... I dunno. An Olympus of some kind.

I just used to read the Famous Five books by Enid Blyton religiously. I loved the adventures in them, I suppose. All the stories were pretty much the same, smugglers and the like. There was always a picnic and ginger beer, "lashings" of the stuff if I remember rightly lol. Maybe I liked the repeating themes. They are so outdated now, I am not sure if I want to read one again. When I was a little bit older than my Famous Five addiction, I also read some of the Goosebumps series by R.L... Stein? Stein I think. So crappy when I look back, but I scared easily back then. Why I read them I'll never know. I guess for the adventures in them, again, but also with the added fun of scaring myself.

[quote name='Fyxe'][size=1]Yet, do we call women who are menstruating murderers? Because really, they are ejecting a potential life source. Just like abortion. ;)[/size][/QUOTE] I never thought of that. Good call! The stress I think is on [i]potential[/i]: it is not yet a human life, but a lot of people don't believe that. I have heard some people say that as soon as first cell divides into two the fetus is a human. I'm not sure about that; all the [i]potential[/i] to be a human is there, yes, but is it [i]actually[/i] a human?

[quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]No wonder people called you "Wussel."[/color][/QUOTE] I think they just had a speech impediment - it's completely unrelated. ;)

[quote name='Fasteriskhead'] Well, it's easy to [i]make[/i] a sentence. All you need is a subject, a verb, maybe a direct or indirect object, and some other stuff for flavor. Anyone can do it. But since I'm an overeducated loser with a lot of free time, I'm actually asking a different question - not "how do you make a sentence?" but "how is making a sentence possible at all?" I find that, generally speaking, the interesting thing about sentences isn't that they follow a grammatical formula (even though that's true). Sentences tell us what's up with stuff, which is something tougher to nail down than grammar.[/QUOTE] Oh right, I understand what you're getting at now. Man this is confusing stuff. [quote]...is it an [i]unconscious[/i] process?[/quote] I think that it is - for the most part. The only times when figuring out sentence requires thought is when it isn't in a regular order (for me anyway), and - I'm sure this applies to everyone - when it is being read by someone from another culture. I can't think of any examples right now, but surely within society different groups read things differently? It may not even be that broad - it may boil down to much more complex things like your personality, your own experiences, your gender, etc. which I don't think I can discuss right now. :animeswea But I can say that maybe this dilemma comes to those who are intellectual daydreamers more often than those who don't think that much about what they are reading in such a deep way. You will only notice that you're conscious of a particular sentence being hard to imagine if you are thinking about the words themselves, and not just the image they create. But then I suppose this doesn't mean that people who don't think deeply about it don't have the same problem: perhaps they [i]unconsciously[/i] notice something being not right about the sentence. As for sentences not being a regular order, I think I have even said something above that makes me confused, even though it is correct: "...surely within society different groups read things differently?" Having 'society' and 'different' next to each other without being seperated by a mark of punctuation, though it isn't needed, makes me have to think about the sentence more. Why? Well, perhaps I am on my own here, but I see 'society different' which doesn't make sense to me, so my brain automatically changes it around to 'different society', which makes more sense, but then when I read on this confuses the sentence even more. Eventually I know that it is correct, and I understand its meaning; but no matter how many times I read it, something just doesn't feel right about it. So perhaps it is the actual structure of a sentence that causes confusion regarding the meaning. As Wittgenstein said, "Philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday." - maybe language itself is the problem. It can never be perfect, after all. Man, this stuff twists my brain like a wet rag.

[quote name='Clurr'][FONT="Arial"]...and I had to convince my sister to sleep in my room that night.[/FONT][/QUOTE] I have to do stuff like that. At uni this year me and some friends watched The Exorcism of Emily Rose and I got so paranoid that I was gonna get possessed - naturally, they jumped at the chance to scare me almost to death by telling me how I'm gonna wake up at 3 a.m, smell burning, get possessed, etc. I was begging one of my friends if I could sleep on his floor. Is that superstition scaring me, or just movie spin? Or just not being a sceptic? I don't know. As it happens, it's 3:01 a.m now. I am scared... lol.

Camping? Noo way will you find me camping in a spooky place like that! It would just [i]never[/i] happen! What get me most are the urban myths. Too close to home for my liking. Oh, and those emails that say "Email this to 12 people in the next 5 minutes or u will die!!" and then they even have proof of people who didn't email it on and died in car crashes and things (made-up of course), but I still get scared, end up forwarding it to X amount of people, continuing the cycle. Argghh - I hate them so much lol.

[quote name='Retribution'][size=1]I apologize if I sounded like a jerk to you, but to be frank, I will not apologize for what I said. Stereotyping and sweeping generalizations are imprudent and dubious at best. I also wonder how much you actually know about Catholics. Now uh... what were we debating about before this? lol[/size][/QUOTE] True that. I think it was abortion. Has anyone ever read [i]Mysoginies[/i] by Joan Smith? There is a very good essay about abortion in there. She's witty, and her argument makes sense. I am not usually a reader of feminist works, but I thought it would be interesting. If anyone can find it, have a read.

Mainly I like single player games. But if with friends, obviously multiplayer! I don't really like fighting games that much (bar SSBM, that is always good for a laugh), so I tend to stick to football games like Pro Evolution. I don't actually own that game, but my friends absolutely love it so I get stuck in when I'm with them. Mario Party can be pretty funny too. I do have a weird thing of watching people play games. Games that I'd never play, like ones in the RE series (they are way too scary for me!!), I watch my friends play and help them out in the annoying puzzles and things. One of my friends does have Gears of War, though, which I love - frequently play online when I'm round his house: Good times! Oh! And the types of single player games I like don't usually have multiplayer options. I like RPGs, Adventure games - standard, really.

[quote name='Retribution'][size=1]Not entirely true. Ancient Rome, for instance, had these girls known as Vestal Virgins. They were to remain celibate and maintain the sacred fire of Vesta. There were no male priests in Roman religion (why? there were purer than men...).[/size][/quote] Yeah, but I'm talking about monotheism, rather than religions circulating around the Roman pantheon of gods. Christianity, mainly. Sorry I didn't make that clear. :animeswea [quote][size=1][i]During the Renaissance, physical beauty was equated with virtue (a throwback to the Greeks). Women were generally thought to be purer of heart than men… hence the phrase “The fairer sex”. These are just some throwaway examples, and if you dig, you’ll see that there was a heavy expectation for them to remain chaste until marriage.[/size][/i][/quote] Of course, this is true too. But then why was there such a [i]heavy[/i] expectation for them to remain chaste? Perhaps society was trying to say something (I do not believe in it myself at all). It was the Original Sin which probably prompted the Christian preachers, the more sexist, in the first place to spread the idea of women as "trouble". Perhaps it's just men being bitter, who knows! There definitely are two sides to this thing, though; throughout the ages there have been, as you rightly say, cultures that value their women as pure, and other cultures that see them as impure - sometimes even the same culture sees women as either sluts or virgins. This was a heavy theme of the Renaissance, in fact ;) [quote][size=1][i]I would assume her position would be to put the child up for adoption.[/size][/i][/QUOTE] I never gave that a thought actually - how silly of me! Well then, by all means, she can do that. [quote name='Lunox'][color=dimgray] I did come on pretty strong, lol. But that's the thing, it's a stupid, drunken mistake. If they get pregnant and have an abortion, that should be their only break, [i]ever[/i]. Allowing people to have multiple abortions because of irresponsible mistakes would be mindblowingly stupid.[/color][/QUOTE] No sweat lol. I definitely disagree with multiple abortions. One mistake is enough to learn from, I will give you that. When a girl starts getting abortions here, there and everywhere as a form of contraception, it does start to get stupid. Then it makes me thinkr, "Should abortions be available in the first place?" Because, inevitably, they will be used more and more frequently, and more casually as well. So, I suppose my stance is rather confused on this subject: while completely for choice, I do wonder how extreme it will be in years to come.

[quote name='Retribution'][size=1]Maybe because women have traditionally been considered the more virtuous and pure of the two sexes? That idea has been with us for quite a while, and I'm assuming this sexism is a manifestation of that expectation for women to be of higher moral fiber than men.[/size][/QUOTE] It hasn't been with us for very long at all. In religion women were always seen as the tempters, the seducers, etc. Traditionally, women have been considered not as virtuous as men - it was up to men to be the more virtuous of the two to save both from sin. Anyway... the whole issue [b]is[/b] rather sexist, I do agree. Lunox, you seem to be pretty hardline though - do you really think teenagers should have to live with the consequences of a stupid, drunken mistake for the rest of their lives? Forget about the child being in the hands of a minor for the second - what about the parent? Are you denouncing any person who makes mistakes...?

[quote name='Jeremiah']Now this, I do not understand. Why is it more acceptable to abort a child that, in it's present state looks like a fish, than it is to abort a child that has taken on the more human look? Both have the potential to become human beings, regardless the stage of development, and this is why I view both as bad as each other. Even without a "sanctity of life" religious conviction, I don't understand why it is accpetable to abort some child's life at all. Ther emust be something I'm missing here.[/QUOTE] It's called freedom to choose whether you want a child or not. People have been doing it for thousands and thousands of years. Just because the issue sparks up more in modern times, it does not mean it is unacceptable. I suppose just because it has been happening for ages doesn't make it acceptable either. It is more acceptable to abort a child in the first stages of pregnancy because there is a point at which the fetus sort of "becomes" human. Don't go mad, but there is a period of time when it isn't properly developed. Surely you'd rather kill a tiny speck of things that, as far as I know, doesn't know what the hell is going on, than what is, essentially, a human in its infancy? If you had the choice that is. It's basically a woman's right to choose. Is it that hard to understand? Just like anyone has the right to make decisions that would change their life forever, i.e. having a baby.

[quote name='Sara'][color=#db2007]Pro-choice!=Pro-abortion.[/color][/QUOTE] I thought so too... Anyways, I am pro-choice, pro-life, whatever. I think any reason for abortion is in reason, as long as it is before the fetus looks like a baby. Or starts to. Then it starts to become a tad gross..

Ummm.. I dunno whether I'm allowed to do this, but there are various pictures [URL="http://port.facebook.com/album.php?aid=-3&l=b011e&id=707795432"][b]here[/b][/URL]. I have changed a lot. I am the one with the dodgy hair in all. (I'm doing this because I don't have an image hosting thing, and the attachments weren't working for me)

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman'][color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]Funny you should mention that movie. I saw a parody of it called [b]All Quiet on the Canine Front[/b] As the title suggests they used dogs instead of people. But it was very amusing. And nicely done. Okay so they gave the dogs voice overs and dressed them up... and maybe just maybe I'm easily amused, but I liked that movie.[/color][/font][/QUOTE] Hahaha - that wouldn't be my thing at all. Weird take on the film though. I suppose it's like film [b]Cats and Dogs[/b], I think that's what it's called anyway. Russian cats as the bad guys... does my head in. lol.

Ever heard of a game called Evergrace? It's for the PS2. I quite enjoyed playing it, but it's not what other people might call brilliant. It is worth a look though. EDIT: Oh, I have to describe it? It's essentially an RPG, with battles in real time instead of turn-based random encounters. The story is pretty interesting, and the graphics are smart. The best thing about it is the customisation with armour and weapons (different combinations give different abilities) - but it's a little hard to explain, so get it!

I'll do anything as long as I know it won't kill me. I have yet to try the harder things, and I do sort of want to for the experience, so there is no real "anti-drug" to keep me off drugs. And it wouldn't be willpower - I lack that completely! But in terms of the feeling, I think laughing is a bit anti-drug. It's really good to laugh really really hard once in a while. Sex is good too. And music, music is.. sort of. Often combined with other things though so that doesn't work.

Why would anyone need or even want to do that? Is there an age restriction or something?

[quote name='Treble'][FONT=Verdana][SIZE=2]On a related note, I tried to replay FFVII the other day, and man is hard to go back those blocky graphics after seeing games like Gears of Wars. [/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE] I know exactly what you mean. It's sort of a very awkward zone between 2D and brilliant 3D that makes you cringe.. just a little bit. It makes you think how far things have come along since.. what was that, 1997? I've also realised old(er) games are much harder than newer ones because objectives were not as clear, and this is much evident in FFVII, when a lot of the time you were shoved onto the world map after being told where you have to go, but not [i]where[/i] this place is. It took me literally hours to figure out where I was supposed to be heading. Maybe I'm just stupid. And the submarine as a convenience? Hardly! It got me lost more than I did on foot!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by [b]Retribution[/b]: [i]I thought that most, if not all religion was engineered around the premise that a follower has to have faith because the higher power is unable to be seen.[/i][/QUOTE] Well, based on that logic, surely we must "have faith" that, for example, stars are actually made of gas, when we clearly cannot see that they are? I mean, yes we know that scientists have proven this as fact, but we, the little people, have no concrete proof that this is so. That's what a sceptic would say. Religion is much too philosophical to be cemented to that premise. It is a shallow thing that requires one to believe in something just because it cannot be seen. I know this isn't the case, because there must be so many things that religion is "engineered" around - so many greater and confounding subjects - than the mere fact that we cannot see this "higher power". I, sadly, cannot think at the moment as to what they might be! :animeswea

[b]One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest[/b] is simply superb. The main characters are believable, and you end up sympathising with nearly all of their situations. Jack Nicholson is brilliant. There are parts when you are not sure whether to laugh or not, and I like that - having designated 'funny points' in films is not always good. A particular funny bit, for me at least, is the group therapy they have. There are more than one, but still they always make me giggle. Some people may think it's sad. Well the whole film is pretty sad. If you haven't seen it, do. I don't really know many others, old films I mean. I would just be repeating what other people said, [b]The Life of Brian[/b], [b]Resevoir Dogs[/b], etc. I like Julia Roberts for films like [B]Runaway Bride[/B] and [B]Pretty Woman[/B]. Nice, feel-good movies! :) I would say [b]All Quiet On The Western Front[/b], c. 1930. I'd recommend the book rather than the film, although it is nice to get a visual perspective on the whole German situation of WWI. A downside is that there is more than just a touch of Hollywood in it, but the story is still there I suppose.

I would say I like a bit of everything, but.. I think my favourite genre is [b]alternative[/b]. This covers such a wide range of music, so I'll list a few bands to give you an idea... Cute Is What We Aim For, hellogoodbye, Brand New, The Postal Service, The Smiths, Enter Shikari, Hadouken!, Rammstein. These are my favourites at the moment, and I know all of them probably aren't rigidly alternative. My family? Well my dad absolutely loves Rammstein. My mum likes listening to Enter Shikari in the car (a few songs, not all). One of my brothers (aged 11) loves Enter Shikari as well. The other one (aged 10) likes them, but loves The Postal Service and hellogoodbye. He also likes the song "There Is A Light That Never Goes Out" by The Smiths. My mum quite likes The Smiths too. All of them like Cute Is What We Aim For (except my dad), and my brothers are with my dad on the Rammstein wagon, but my mum doesn't like them so much. My dad hates Enter Shikari, lol. It is sometimes odd to have your mum singing along to an Enter Shikari song in the car.. but I'd rather that than she hated it. Oh and my uncle is a diehard fan of drum 'n' bass, which I also like. He goes to massive raves and stuff..

I did exactly the same thing. Last year I played FFIX for the first time in.. I don't know when, years I should imagine, and finally got out of Fossil Roo (that was why I stopped playing it in the first place! :animeswea). Then I didn't do anything. A week ago I started to play it again and I have literally been addicted, and am on the third disk now - it must be the longest stretch of time to complete a game ever! It is odd to think of PS games as 'old' but I suppose they are now, probably because we grew up with them not long ago. Perhaps it's because things are moving so fast in the gaming world these days, who knows. I also started to play Chrono Trigger again a few weeks back. Nearly completed it, but... I got bored near the end and abandoned it. I always do that, lol.

There is definitely potential here; I think all poems about this sort of thing always hit a nerve somewhere with someone. I think your repetition at the start reeks of a cheesy love-ballad. There is not much you can do with the words there, but it would be good perhaps to not repeat or even just keep it to one line. I won't do that for you, otherwise it woudn't be your poem. "Fading distant memories" I think either fading or distant would fit here, but not both. I think the use of two descriptive word makes it sound almost unintelligent. Less is sometimes more. Perhaps just "Fading memories"? The rest of the poem, basically, is just dealing in cliches too much. Here are the main culprits: "I no longer have the strength" "smooth complexion" "enchanting eyes" "moments that we've shared" These need to be made more interesting; keep the sense of the words, or maybe even make it stronger, but use adjectives and phrases that people won't yawn at. It is better for them to be unique so they will jump out at you (there's a cliche!). Try a thesaurus, or read more: it helps. "The laughs and hugs that we've embraced" This is grammatically incorrect, you can't embrace a laugh or a hug. You can embrace, which basically is a hug, though. Figure out what word will fit there instead. Maybe even change the line - it's up to you. "I no longer need your memories" It should be "memories of you". Also "I no longer need" seems a long and rickety way to say such a simple thing. People value ease and simplicity over flowery clauses sometimes. I noticed you used it before as well. Make it flow better by changing the phrase itself, but, as always, keep the meaning. I don't think the "or" in the last stanza works. It sounds too much like a list. Get rid of it. Overall? Well, I won't lie, it seems pretty generic. Make it a bit different, a bit more interesting, and it would stand out a little. Try not to repeat so much; it might sound good at the time but it doesn't. Keep at it!

Surely education should cover a more varied curriculum than the 'either... or...' of Darwinism and Creationism? Both should be studied, in my opinion. And .. Starwind is it? Are you or are you not being as narrow-minded as these "bible thumping rednecks" by completely rubbishing their side of the argument?