Can we have a Wanker's Corner?

[onebatmother]

Hello.

It's been noted in the past that there are some pretentious wankers amongst us who like to discuss some general subjects (eg.Porn, Religion) in a fairly, erm.. academic manner, and that this sometimes seems to intimidate and/or infuriate other posters.

There doesn't seem to be an easy solution to this problem: there's no doubt that people really do feel intimidated and that it might prevent them from posting on a subject that concerns them. It also must feel hijack-y at times.

At the same time, it's hard for the Wanker's to be told that they mustn't post anything that might intimidate.

Would it be possible to have a special place, with very hard chairs to keep us awake, that we may call our own?

BOOOOOOOORING

geek's together in a special place- smashing.then those of us who have a life can avoid you.studiously

god forbid that your cerebral musings be interrupted or misinterpreted by hoi polloi christ anyone would think one wanted a debate!?hell cant have any of these fancy democratic speak your mind malarkey thingies

IB, you left the fucking door unlocked AGAIN

But it doesn't need to be a priest, does it Iorek. Could be a random MNer, etc.

Did I just get sand kicked in my eyes there?

Threadwworm you are right. Not only could be but is. Punishments a bit more severe on AIBU though.

I said to onebat when she started this thread it would end in tears.

Instead of 3 Hail Marys, Mumsnet sends you to Style and Beauty with a naked (but for your knickers and bra photo) on your profile.

There is something deeply Judas about Iorek's desire to distance herself from this thread. Policywonk sprayed and still Iorek betrayed. Which brings us neatly back to the free-will discussion. If Jesus foresaw the betrayal of Judas, was there any exercise of free-will on the part of Judas? Was Judas morally responsible for his betrayal? We are also back to Aquinas' Summa Theologica?

Fark.

Aaarggh!!! Swedes you are a beast. I'm not Judas and I'm not distancing myself from the thread. I did say to onebat it would end in tears. It didn't occur to me that in saying childishly "I told you so" that I would be laying all the blame of geekdom on her. I wasn't.

I wish someone had warned me about not wanking after midnight.

And anyway, how could I possibly distance myself from the thread in the eyes of the posters who wandered in to scoff after the pubs closed, when it was my wank that inspired all their inappropriately apostrophised scorn in the first place.

(Am I making this worse?)

Don't fret Iorek. You are not a Judas. Swedes is picking us all off one by one with her erudite insults -- You are called a Judas; I am accused of vainglorious gula superbia, and Onebat is an overanalysing wanker.

Anyway it would be more accurate to call you a Peter, who thrice denied being a wanker before the cock crowed.

What cock? I have never denied being a wanker on here. (Can you tell I'm still cross?)

That should of course read

What cock!

Oh dear. I didn't mean it. I'm sure Swedes didn't either. You are a self-acknowledged wanker and rightly proud of it.

Ah yes, 'What cock!' makes more sense than 'What cock?' I don't think the Bible specifies the cock in question.

Well I'm not actually proud of it, obviously. But it all seemed harmless enough once...

I didn't mean for a little light crowing to turn into a discussion on Socrates and the paradox of self-deception.

I don't think this thread is any more cliquey than the BAAAAAARRRRR or the veggers' threads (for example). Everyone is truly welcome to join in - or not. And posters are welcome to post insults and complaints. I don't take it seriously and assume others don't. I couldn't be intellectually intimidating even if I wanted to be.

I would love a discussion of Socrates and the paradox of self-deception. Were we having one?

As far as insults go, I can take "geek's", "boring" and quite happily on the chin, but Judas is a little on the harsh side. Especially delivered in the third person.

Iorek, I like your post of Tue 09-Sep-08 10:51:43 on the imaginary friend thread. And I would like to expand some time on the god as ego-ideal thing, despite my growing nervousness about public wankery. Not now, because I should be working, but sometime.

Thank you, Threadwworm. Hope your work is going well.

On the subject of singing and personality (re Gwendolen's contrast with Miss Arrowpoint) I've just remembered a weird short novel I read years ago by the American James Cain. It's called Mildred Pierce, and it figures a completely vile, monsterous, manipulative woman who eventually becomes very successful as a coloratura(sp) singer. The point seems to be that being vile and singing coloratura are somehow linked. Very odd. Is it true I wonder.

It's certainly an idea one comes across quite often. It would seem horribly unfair to coloratura sopranos to say that it was true. But perhaps there is something about the need to impress by means of highly sophisticated controlled screaming that doesn't sit easily with a balanced personality.

Is it really a common idea? Poor coloratura singers. LOL at controlled screaming. I have tried that bit in The Magic Flute (??I think) in deepest private, and think I could bring universe to an end more effectively than the Large Hadron Collider.

LOL at lots of things, most recently controlled screaming. I am .. g&t at that.

What cock? was also v good (whichever way you choose to take it).

Blimey, it's all been happening down this end of the corridor, hasn't it? As Swedes so rightly says, anyone, even cunts, are welcome to come and wank here. This thread was conceived as a place where wankers would not annoy non-wankers - not as a retreat from the hoi-polloi.

Balls, am quite busy at the mo. But may I second Iorek's request for an expansion of the idealized ego thing? Also the paradox of self-deception thing sounds good. I have bought Daniel Deronda on ebay but it hasn't yet arrived.

Oh also lol at Swedes picking us off one by one. She has a crossbow. Like those excellent Seventies Deliverance-type films.

Pol and Threadie, might I strongly recommend that if you answer a call of nature in the night and have to leave the bivouac, you go together. Or at least take your Leathermen. There's only two left standing. Who will be next?

I don't think Swedes meant it, Iorek.

On the matter of Judas' betrayal, I don't think that Jesus' foreknowledge of it disproves Free Will. A Christian would probably say that it was the Free Will that came first (Judas decides), and then the foreknowledge is retroactively applied (rewind to the last supper - Jesus Knows.)

Which is all a bit quantum.

On that note I have been listening to snatches of the BB day on R4. I got the nice WH bit about female research scientists finding it hard to juggle research scienting with having a family. The rest - nada.