|
No special treatment is required - just a little care and thought.
Thoughtless remarks can cause unnecessarily harm to vulnerable (who by definition are likely to have "have over-heightened sensibilities" through no fault of their own).
Worse, they influence others to do likewise.
Please at least try to be more thoughtful.
Anna ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
Tech Blog | Visual Lint
"Why would anyone prefer to wield a weapon that takes both hands at once, when they could use a lighter (and obviously superior) weapon that allows you to wield multiple ones at a time, and thus supports multi-paradigm carnage?"
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: If someone wants special treatment because of life choices, sexual preferences,
because they only use apple products, or for anything else that they wrongly
think merits special treatment, I'm afraid it ain't gonna happen.
So it is quite ok with you if 90% of the stores could refuse to sell you anything because of your skin color? And also ok if 90% of businesses refused to hire you because of your religion choice?
And certainly ok with you that if 90% of people decided that they found you personally offensive for something that they thought that you might do in the privacy of your own home that they could insist that all businesses refuse to do any sort of business at all with you?
|
|
|
|
|
As always, you are intentionally interpreting what I say as the exact opposite of what I say.
Try reading the words I write, rather than listening to the little hate-filled voices in your head.
It's getting a bit tedious, y'know.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
You said "If someone wants special treatment because of life choices, sexual preferences...I'm afraid it ain't gonna happen".
It wasn't clear to me, especially in the context of your other comments, what exactly you think "special treatment" is exactly.
Certainly some people do in fact think that "special treatment" is a law that disallows people from doing exactly what I said (and which does happen without such laws.)
Mark_Wallace wrote: ...than listening to the little hate-filled voices in your head.
Certainly possible that we are saying the same thing but I am rather certain that term does not apply to me. Especially not in a discussion about what 'gay' means in the current vernacular given that I first spoke out publicly for homosexual rights in 1974.
|
|
|
|
|
This really isn't worth my time to discuss, but if you can't tell the difference between treating everyone equally and giving certain groups of people special treatment, then you perhaps should refer to a dictionary.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: This really isn't worth my time to discuss, but if you can't tell the difference between treating everyone equally and giving certain groups of people special treatment, then you perhaps should refer to a dictionary.
And if you don't know enough history to understand how African Americans were treated in the US for 130 years since they were freed from slavery despite the fact that they were supposed to be "equal" then perhaps you need to read up to understand how laws are in fact needed to correct disparities.
|
|
|
|
|
We're not talking about US history, we're not talking about how Africans were treated in your "land of the free", and we're not talking about US law.
Perhaps you should look up "A.D.D.", as well as the differences between the words "equal" and "special".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: We're not talking about US history, we're not talking about how Africans were treated in your "land of the free", and we're not talking about US law.
And yet the UK needed to take exactly the same corrective action...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/74[^]
|
|
|
|
|
And yet you're still harping on about things that have nothing to do with the discussion.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Feeling a little too PC todat(sic)?
Not at all. And they weren't facts.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
_Maxxx_ wrote: And they weren't facts.
You've never been to Shepherd's Bush, then?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
As it happens, yes I have.
As it also happens, I think the BBC aren't there any more anyway.
I'm pretty sure there were some gay people there as statistically speaking there would be. But (apparently unlike you) I don't go around wondering at other peoples sexual preferences.
I really don't care if you shag men, women or donkeys, but (unless you really are 14 years old) feel you should perhaps grow up and act a little more maturely.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
_Maxxx_ wrote: I'm pretty sure there were some gay people there as statistically speaking there would be.
Indeed. 90%. Are you paying attention, or what?
_Maxxx_ wrote: But (apparently unlike you) I don't go around wondering at other peoples sexual preferences.
You don't have to be particularly observant to recognise that you're the odd man out.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: The ability to speak facts, unencumbered by ridiculous social mores, does not
imply anything other than contempt for ridiculous social mores.
True = but of course one must first start with a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
i-Don't know. i-Really couldn't say. 
|
|
|
|
|
BBC should be concentrating on TV programming not Computer Programming that's our TV license money goes.
BBC Micro was a excellent machine for the time, albeit expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
NormDroid wrote: BBC should be concentrating on TV programming not Computer Programming
Absolute nonsense. Part of the remit of the BBC is to provide educational programmes. How do you think so many people got into programming back in the 80s? It was through the excellent "Me and My Micro" series. I'd rather they spent my fee educating people.
|
|
|
|
|
I would definitely prefer my TV license money to be spent on educational projects rather than all that stupid chav shows.
|
|
|
|
|
Ditto.
I loved my BBC Micro model B.
Some times I still hear the two tone 'turning on' sound in my head. It was so loud and had no mute switch. I used to try and muffle it with a jumper so I wouldn't be caught turning my computer on when I shouldn't be.
|
|
|
|
|
Although I preferred the C64 for programming, I did enjoy programming the BBC Micro and got a top grade for a school project for which I wrote a database system in BASIC, complete with search and editing features. I also wrote the odd scientific program on the BBC. I never went on to make a living in IT though, it was never what I wanted to do for a career, though I still code a lot (but not on the BBC anymore, though I played on an emulator recently!). I code mostly for fun, but sometimes I write apps for other people. So I guess whether or not these schemes encourage people into the IT industry, software development is a useful and fun skill to have nevertheless.
|
|
|
|
|
Happy 22nd Birthday To MySelf.
And Happy Spending it in the office, where everybody is so busy Pilot Testing on the System,
and they just totally forgot that today is my birthday!
Anyways, a HAPPY BIRTHDAY to MYSELF. 
|
|
|
|
|
That can make you go blind!
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
<big>LOOOOL!</big> 5ed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you so much! 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
