FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > The alternate selfishness...
The alternate selfishness...
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
Well said I totally agree
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Unfortunately freedom of speech in situations like this just further divide. And it's not like in this situation people are just saying their opinion and leaving it at that, they are stating it as if they are either morally superior or alternately "not one of the sheep". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules .... "
Dominic Cummings...according to him! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules ....
Dominic Cummings...according to him!"
That old chestnut. Can't you move on from DC? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules .... "
The post isn't about rule breaking, it's about judgemental attitudes towards other peoples needs based off own personal circumstances. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm reminded of the old saying .. ' Opinions and arseholes.. etc' just because we have a different opinion to someone does not give us the right to go around shoving them in other peoples faces to a point of becoming a problem .. OP is right though there are some fairly angry men particularly on here these days .. I have seen lots of fairly sinister replies from people when they think they are somehow right about something .
I think a lot are missing the 'freedom' of being able to speak their minds in pubs with their mates or something .. either way .. no need for it IMHO |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm reminded of the old saying .. ' Opinions and arseholes.. etc' just because we have a different opinion to someone does not give us the right to go around shoving them in other peoples faces to a point of becoming a problem .. OP is right though there are some fairly angry men particularly on here these days .. I have seen lots of fairly sinister replies from people when they think they are somehow right about something .
I think a lot are missing the 'freedom' of being able to speak their minds in pubs with their mates or something .. either way .. no need for it IMHO "
I don't think it's only men tbf but yes there are a lot of angry men |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *sGivesWoodWoman
over a year ago
ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL |
"I'm reminded of the old saying .. ' Opinions and arseholes.. etc' just because we have a different opinion to someone does not give us the right to go around shoving them in other peoples faces to a point of becoming a problem .. OP is right though there are some fairly angry men particularly on here these days .. I have seen lots of fairly sinister replies from people when they think they are somehow right about something .
I think a lot are missing the 'freedom' of being able to speak their minds in pubs with their mates or something .. either way .. no need for it IMHO
I don't think it's only men tbf but yes there are a lot of angry men"
I'm finding there's a lot of angry couples on here, women, not so many. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules ....
The post isn't about rule breaking, it's about judgemental attitudes towards other peoples needs based off own personal circumstances. "
If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple. "
We're back to that agin, too many think their misinformed often selfserving opinion acts as some counterpoint to facts and the rules that are place to reduce the spread of the virus.
And then there's those that know and don't care. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
We're back to that agin, too many think their misinformed often selfserving opinion acts as some counterpoint to facts and the rules that are place to reduce the spread of the virus.
And then there's those that know and don't care."
Yep...... those people can be found in their thousands on here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules ....
The post isn't about rule breaking, it's about judgemental attitudes towards other peoples needs based off own personal circumstances.
If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Again, the post isn't about rules and guidelines. It's about up themselves moral arbiters believing their shoe should fit all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *sGivesWoodWoman
over a year ago
ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL |
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules ....
The post isn't about rule breaking, it's about judgemental attitudes towards other peoples needs based off own personal circumstances.
If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!
Again, the post isn't about rules and guidelines. It's about up themselves moral arbiters believing their shoe should fit all"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple. "
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
"
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple. "
Is that your opinion? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?"
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Is that your opinion? "
No it’s stating a fact - if you don’t minimise spread of a virus you will kill people. Viruses don’t give a shot about opinions they just work on fact. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege. "
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm reminded of the old saying .. ' Opinions and arseholes.. etc' just because we have a different opinion to someone does not give us the right to go around shoving them in other peoples faces to a point of becoming a problem .. OP is right though there are some fairly angry men particularly on here these days .. I have seen lots of fairly sinister replies from people when they think they are somehow right about something .
I think a lot are missing the 'freedom' of being able to speak their minds in pubs with their mates or something .. either way .. no need for it IMHO
I don't think it's only men tbf but yes there are a lot of angry men
I'm finding there's a lot of angry couples on here, women, not so many."
I'm glad you said that because I have noticed the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege. "
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes. "
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd."
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that."
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
the saddest thing i heard in all this was an elderly chronically ill lady upset that her Christmas plans had been disrupted with her family. She has less than a year to live and will never get another one and possibly may die alone now.. is our collective selfish fear of death responsible for her lonely death?
d |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about? "
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all. "
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"the saddest thing i heard in all this was an elderly chronically ill lady upset that her Christmas plans had been disrupted with her family. She has less than a year to live and will never get another one and possibly may die alone now.. is our collective selfish fear of death responsible for her lonely death?
d"
Why was she not in a bubble? She needed not to have been alone ... it’s awful how many elderly people are suffering for many reasons throughout all this. This is more reason that people need to stick to the rules so the limited time these people have left isn’t spent in lockdown |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts. "
I read what you said perfectly. What you did was exactly what I was talking about, with “opinion of your need". There is everything wrong with judging peoples actions and needs based on your own personal circumstance. Again, not all shoes fit all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts.
I read what you said perfectly. What you did was exactly what I was talking about, with “opinion of your need". There is everything wrong with judging peoples actions and needs based on your own personal circumstance. Again, not all shoes fit all. "
Righty ho - good luck  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts. "
I agree fully that someone saying I need a meet/blowjob/shag etc is selfish. But I meant product needs not interpersonal or sexual needs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple. "
Actually, I can give you an example.
Prior to the latest round of restrictions, my mother had decided to organise a (quite rare, these days) Boxing Day get-together of all the immediate family (I have several brothers). Just for the day and primarily so that my mother could see us all together again.
Selfish as hell, surely!
So let me add details:
My mother is dying, of a particularly unpleasant and currently incurable disease. From the rate of her decline it is highly likely this was her last Christmas.
Whilst both she and my father - who suddenly became her full time carer at an age when he himself should have been long since retired - are in a high risk category they were keen for us all to attend PROVIDED none of us were showing symptoms or had been recently near anyone who was. None of us would have put them at that risk and it would only have gone ahead as long as they - the people most at risk - were happy with it.
Between us brothers we all agreed that in this instance it was more important for my mother to see us all again, at what will probably be her last Christmas.
This approach is not uncommon regarding patients in palliative care: if someone close to you is already dying, you may find your priorities change.
I invite you to sit at my mother's bedside and you can judge her from there if you wish. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Actually, I can give you an example.
Prior to the latest round of restrictions, my mother had decided to organise a (quite rare, these days) Boxing Day get-together of all the immediate family (I have several brothers). Just for the day and primarily so that my mother could see us all together again.
Selfish as hell, surely!
So let me add details:
My mother is dying, of a particularly unpleasant and currently incurable disease. From the rate of her decline it is highly likely this was her last Christmas.
Whilst both she and my father - who suddenly became her full time carer at an age when he himself should have been long since retired - are in a high risk category they were keen for us all to attend PROVIDED none of us were showing symptoms or had been recently near anyone who was. None of us would have put them at that risk and it would only have gone ahead as long as they - the people most at risk - were happy with it.
Between us brothers we all agreed that in this instance it was more important for my mother to see us all again, at what will probably be her last Christmas.
This approach is not uncommon regarding patients in palliative care: if someone close to you is already dying, you may find your priorities change.
I invite you to sit at my mother's bedside and you can judge her from there if you wish."
I think very few people would call that selfish
Hope She enjoyed her chrimbo
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the saddest thing i heard in all this was an elderly chronically ill lady upset that her Christmas plans had been disrupted with her family. She has less than a year to live and will never get another one and possibly may die alone now.. is our collective selfish fear of death responsible for her lonely death?
d
Why was she not in a bubble? She needed not to have been alone ... it’s awful how many elderly people are suffering for many reasons throughout all this. This is more reason that people need to stick to the rules so the limited time these people have left isn’t spent in lockdown "
no this is the product of fear. i guess one of her family members may have been in her bubble but not all.. that's several family members she may never see again just because it would be breaking the rules. Like her, id rather die. I've been working on the front line so have seen all sorts but a lot of it is frankly ridiculous. Like the laws that presented this lady from having one last family Christmas. my mum is crippled with dementia and can't remember her grandchildrens names.. i broke the rules a few times to help and i believe if i hadn't she wouldn't know who i was either
d |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"the saddest thing i heard in all this was an elderly chronically ill lady upset that her Christmas plans had been disrupted with her family. She has less than a year to live and will never get another one and possibly may die alone now.. is our collective selfish fear of death responsible for her lonely death?
d
Why was she not in a bubble? She needed not to have been alone ... it’s awful how many elderly people are suffering for many reasons throughout all this. This is more reason that people need to stick to the rules so the limited time these people have left isn’t spent in lockdown
no this is the product of fear. i guess one of her family members may have been in her bubble but not all.. that's several family members she may never see again just because it would be breaking the rules. Like her, id rather die. I've been working on the front line so have seen all sorts but a lot of it is frankly ridiculous. Like the laws that presented this lady from having one last family Christmas. my mum is crippled with dementia and can't remember her grandchildrens names.. i broke the rules a few times to help and i believe if i hadn't she wouldn't know who i was either
d"
Isn’t it awful how much fear the elderly have - makes me even angrier at people for advertising meets on here. All so much unnecessary pain which could have been avoided. My Mum is elderly and if she had needed me I’d have done the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"i firmly believe me taking the kids to see her when i by the rules shouldn't have may have saved my mums sentient life for a while longer "
You are allowed to see her if she lives alone though ... this isn’t breaking any rules. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]"
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Actually, I can give you an example.
Prior to the latest round of restrictions, my mother had decided to organise a (quite rare, these days) Boxing Day get-together of all the immediate family (I have several brothers). Just for the day and primarily so that my mother could see us all together again.
Selfish as hell, surely!
So let me add details:
My mother is dying, of a particularly unpleasant and currently incurable disease. From the rate of her decline it is highly likely this was her last Christmas.
Whilst both she and my father - who suddenly became her full time carer at an age when he himself should have been long since retired - are in a high risk category they were keen for us all to attend PROVIDED none of us were showing symptoms or had been recently near anyone who was. None of us would have put them at that risk and it would only have gone ahead as long as they - the people most at risk - were happy with it.
Between us brothers we all agreed that in this instance it was more important for my mother to see us all again, at what will probably be her last Christmas.
This approach is not uncommon regarding patients in palliative care: if someone close to you is already dying, you may find your priorities change.
I invite you to sit at my mother's bedside and you can judge her from there if you wish."
..... I would have done the same if it were my mums last Christmas. This issue of a loved ones last Christmas is totally different to people wanting to meet strangers for sex. I hope your mum had a lovely Christmas |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it."
I have replied and yes the exact people I was referring to was people on this site looking for meets ...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it.
I have replied and yes the exact people I was referring to was people on this site looking for meets ...... "
I refer you - and any of the others on here who are so caught-up in their own self-righteous indignation and self-appointed sense of being arbiters of 'social justice' to actually stop and think properly about things instead of just reacting - to my previous statement.
It still stands. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts.
I agree fully that someone saying I need a meet/blowjob/shag etc is selfish. But I meant product needs not interpersonal or sexual needs. "
Ahhhhh .... totally misunderstood. As far as I’m concerned everyone has different ideas of what’s essential. I think garden centres are pushing it some what but in other countries have banned alcohol and cigarettes. Does it really matter what other people are or aren’t buying I don’t think so and I certainly don’t care of someone wants fags. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it.
I have replied and yes the exact people I was referring to was people on this site looking for meets ......
I refer you - and any of the others on here who are so caught-up in their own self-righteous indignation and self-appointed sense of being arbiters of 'social justice' to actually stop and think properly about things instead of just reacting - to my previous statement.
It still stands."
I don’t think calling people looking for meets selfish is self righteous in the slightest. These very people are the reason so many families had their hearts broken this Christmas- I think you’re angry at the wrong person but if it makes you feel better go ahead. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i apologise if i missed your point about casual sex im having text arguments with zealots on Facebook... there is only one house allowed in your bubble.. and my sister is hers
d |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hickennchipsWoman
over a year ago
up above the streets and houses |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Actually, I can give you an example.
Prior to the latest round of restrictions, my mother had decided to organise a (quite rare, these days) Boxing Day get-together of all the immediate family (I have several brothers). Just for the day and primarily so that my mother could see us all together again.
Selfish as hell, surely!
So let me add details:
My mother is dying, of a particularly unpleasant and currently incurable disease. From the rate of her decline it is highly likely this was her last Christmas.
Whilst both she and my father - who suddenly became her full time carer at an age when he himself should have been long since retired - are in a high risk category they were keen for us all to attend PROVIDED none of us were showing symptoms or had been recently near anyone who was. None of us would have put them at that risk and it would only have gone ahead as long as they - the people most at risk - were happy with it.
Between us brothers we all agreed that in this instance it was more important for my mother to see us all again, at what will probably be her last Christmas.
This approach is not uncommon regarding patients in palliative care: if someone close to you is already dying, you may find your priorities change.
I invite you to sit at my mother's bedside and you can judge her from there if you wish."
Aww, this is so sad. I’m glad you made that decision to be with her, not a selfish act at all. Covid has got people going crazy and damn judgemental, you did the right thing, morally and emotionally |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"i apologise if i missed your point about casual sex im having text arguments with zealots on Facebook... there is only one house allowed in your bubble.. and my sister is hers
d"
Ha think a lot of crossed wires on this thread I’m sick to the back teeth of men messaging me today wanting meets and that’s all I saw. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
"
Yes it does when people are clearly just being entitled and actually quite self centred.
People are allowed to disagree with people's choices and actually are you not trying to shame people that think differently to you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
In the end it did not go ahead.
And no,to answer another's question, my mother did not have a particularly happy Christmas: she cancelled the get-together because she was so worried about the admittedly-remote chance of my father becoming ill and -selfishly, I suppose - what would happen to her as a result. To whit: she would be taken off to a nursing home, surrounded by strangers, albeit caring ones, which could be anywhere in the county and possibly miles from her home and family.
It was difficult for her to decide to cancel but she is, after all, a scared and dying 73 year old.
I am leaving this thread now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all. "
You are being rather rude and aggressive and there is no need for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it.
I have replied and yes the exact people I was referring to was people on this site looking for meets ......
I refer you - and any of the others on here who are so caught-up in their own self-righteous indignation and self-appointed sense of being arbiters of 'social justice' to actually stop and think properly about things instead of just reacting - to my previous statement.
It still stands.
I don’t think calling people looking for meets selfish is self righteous in the slightest. These very people are the reason so many families had their hearts broken this Christmas- I think you’re angry at the wrong person but if it makes you feel better go ahead. "
Your stance regarding not abiding to restrictions was not limited to those looking for meets previously. You said anyone stepping out of line was guilty, no questions asked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts.
I agree fully that someone saying I need a meet/blowjob/shag etc is selfish. But I meant product needs not interpersonal or sexual needs.
Ahhhhh .... totally misunderstood. As far as I’m concerned everyone has different ideas of what’s essential. I think garden centres are pushing it some what but in other countries have banned alcohol and cigarettes. Does it really matter what other people are or aren’t buying I don’t think so and I certainly don’t care of someone wants fags."
No worries, It's quite easy to misunderstand on these threads lol, maybe it's the format or something! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
I was using lockdown rules as an example if YOU can actually read. There is nothing wrong with judging people everyone does it some just don’t own up to it. Some subjects are not simply about opinion of judgment they’re just facts.
I agree fully that someone saying I need a meet/blowjob/shag etc is selfish. But I meant product needs not interpersonal or sexual needs.
Ahhhhh .... totally misunderstood. As far as I’m concerned everyone has different ideas of what’s essential. I think garden centres are pushing it some what but in other countries have banned alcohol and cigarettes. Does it really matter what other people are or aren’t buying I don’t think so and I certainly don’t care of someone wants fags.
No worries, It's quite easy to misunderstand on these threads lol, maybe it's the format or something! "
Text is so hard to interpret too isn’t it. I think I come across as quite brusque as I type quickly my first thoughts too - so apologies for that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
Yes it does when people are clearly just being entitled and actually quite self centred.
People are allowed to disagree with people's choices and actually are you not trying to shame people that think differently to you?"
No, actually, I understand that peoples requirements and needs are different to mine and accept that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
Yes it does when people are clearly just being entitled and actually quite self centred.
People are allowed to disagree with people's choices and actually are you not trying to shame people that think differently to you?
No, actually, I understand that peoples requirements and needs are different to mine and accept that. "
It's not coming across that way at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's interesting to see how revealing this situation is regardless of opinons as it manifests so manys inner karen, all the while, ultimately having the effectiveness of canute holding back the waves. what a timeline.
Imo I would hope that people are conscientious and safe, a responsibilty for them to figure out for themselves just like everyone else.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"[Removed by poster at 06/01/21 17:27:38]
"If someone is being selfish, breaking the guidelines and adding to the mess we are in - bankruptcy’s, deaths, suicides damn right I’m judging!! I’m judging hard!"
Your words.
You made blanket statements regarding anyone who breaks from guidelines (which are different from rules) and did not, until challenged, begin to refine your target to people wanting sexual meets.
Again, I invite you to take a seat and judge my mother's selfishness for yourself.
Think, before you speak.
Actually be clear in your own mind what you are tryinyto say.
And then have the backbone to stand by it.
I have replied and yes the exact people I was referring to was people on this site looking for meets ......
I refer you - and any of the others on here who are so caught-up in their own self-righteous indignation and self-appointed sense of being arbiters of 'social justice' to actually stop and think properly about things instead of just reacting - to my previous statement.
It still stands.
I don’t think calling people looking for meets selfish is self righteous in the slightest. These very people are the reason so many families had their hearts broken this Christmas- I think you’re angry at the wrong person but if it makes you feel better go ahead. Your stance regarding not abiding to restrictions was not limited to those looking for meets previously. You said anyone stepping out of line was guilty, no questions asked."
Yeah I’ve explained myself already so if you scroll then you can read for yourself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
You are being rather rude and aggressive and there is no need for it."
I haven't been aggressive in the slightest. And anything misconstrued as rude was simply trying to refer people's eyes back to what I was saying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Of course people need to make difficult decisions that technically mean they are breaking the rules.
Most people that I have seen are very compassionate on threads with people that have faced these situations.
What people tend to have a problem with is people that have a total disregard for anybody else's safety just because they feel their need for whatever is greater. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. "
Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Maybe try reading, instead of reading something and then replying to fit what you want to say? I've explained pretty well on this thread what I'm on about, but you keep going on about rule breakers?
I'm talking about people judging others, based on their own needs and requirements, for their views on what they need and require for their own completely different circumstances and labelling them because they can't grasp that their own shoe does not fit all.
You are being rather rude and aggressive and there is no need for it.
I haven't been aggressive in the slightest. And anything misconstrued as rude was simply trying to refer people's eyes back to what I was saying. "
I disagree. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering? "
Not when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there is no justification. This is the area where there is just simply no need. Tell me why a person ‘needs’ to meet for casual sex. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering? "
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it."
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong. "
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
"
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn. "
If you had actually read my responses to this thread you wouldn't needed to have posted this! Please read again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn.
If you had actually read my responses to this thread you wouldn't needed to have posted this! Please read again. "
I was not referring to casual sex I was quoting you who had. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm guessing you're focused on casual sex because you're on fab but there are people breaking the rules for all sorts of purposes out with fab. I have neighbours who at no point in time have observed a lockdown for no apparent reason and have continually had family and friends over throughout the covid situation.
However, I also believe that there are people for whom the need for companionship or company or physical interaction with another human being at some point is a matter of life and death. If you can understand that, good. If not, then you judgement of others is simply a need to feel morally superior. Which in itself is also human nature.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn. "
They wouldn’t actually be bending the rules in this respect :-
Harm and compassionate visits - you can leave home to be with someone who is giving birth, to avoid injury or illness or to escape risk of harm (such as domestic abuse). You can also leave home to visit someone who is dying or someone in a care home (if permitted under care home guidance), hospice, or hospital, or to accompany them to a medical appointment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
I think I did the quote thing wrong. My argument is basically if you reduce the argument to casual sex which the other poster constantly did, then I agree there is no justification. But once you look beyond that and see the nuances in the different situations of people, it is dangerous and unhelpful to cast judgement without weighing up their reasons first. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn. "
Because meeting for casual sex was the situation I have been talking about throughout this whole thread ..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn.
They wouldn’t actually be bending the rules in this respect :-
Harm and compassionate visits - you can leave home to be with someone who is giving birth, to avoid injury or illness or to escape risk of harm (such as domestic abuse). You can also leave home to visit someone who is dying or someone in a care home (if permitted under care home guidance), hospice, or hospital, or to accompany them to a medical appointment."
Exactly.
I have never seen people say on posts like this that its wrong.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think I did the quote thing wrong. My argument is basically if you reduce the argument to casual sex which the other poster constantly did, then I agree there is no justification. But once you look beyond that and see the nuances in the different situations of people, it is dangerous and unhelpful to cast judgement without weighing up their reasons first. "
But it's not reducing it to anything that's her opinion and her perspective and that is totally acceptable. It's funny that this thread is meant to be about people shaming people when actually the only shaming that has gone on is somebody that dares to have a different take on things to the rest of you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Finally you are able to see that there are grey areas.
There are no grey areas when it comes to meeting for casual sex no there aren’t. Again you are the one to narrow the argument to breaking rules for casual sex in this instance. Can you see that other people might have their own justification for not adhering?
Anyone can try and make justifications for their actions it doesn't mean that it is right and it doesn't mean the others have to accept it or agree with it.
Fair. But I think that in making clinical blanket judgements and not on an individual case by case basis is simply wrong.
The rules and the law are not meant to be tailored to individual cases.
I'm sorry but it is never Acceptable for somebody to put the health of others at risk for a shag.Yes people are getting frustrated and yes people are getting lonely however that does not mean that my life or that of somebody else should be put at risk.
Again, why are we reducing the argument down to the purposes of meets only as reasons for rule breaking? To use the example of the above poster and his dying mum. If they made a risk assessment and believed they made efforts in minimising the risk to everyone else outside their circle, I wouldn't hold it against them for bending the rules to spend one last time with her. It is the people who have no regard for risk to others and who act without that consideration which I condemn personally. Meeting for sex I wholeheartedly condemn.
They wouldn’t actually be bending the rules in this respect :-
Harm and compassionate visits - you can leave home to be with someone who is giving birth, to avoid injury or illness or to escape risk of harm (such as domestic abuse). You can also leave home to visit someone who is dying or someone in a care home (if permitted under care home guidance), hospice, or hospital, or to accompany them to a medical appointment."
I did think that there was something somewhere that covered this but wasn’t sure |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Is that your opinion?
No it’s stating a fact - if you don’t minimise spread of a virus you will kill people. Viruses don’t give a shot about opinions they just work on fact. "
Ah, now virus's can tell the difference? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about? "
Tbf, I have seen and had requests for meets but I've yet to see anyone justifying meets. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that."
Absolutely |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Tbf, I have seen and had requests for meets but I've yet to see anyone justifying meets. "
I have. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
You’re posting in the virus forum about people’s opinions. What exactly are you referring to? The only opinions I see in here is ones that try and justify meeting for casual sex. Which opinions are you talking about?
Tbf, I have seen and had requests for meets but I've yet to see anyone justifying meets. "
I have |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd."
I'm also concerned about the misinformation given by the ones who blindly support fanatical bullies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
Is that your opinion?
No it’s stating a fact - if you don’t minimise spread of a virus you will kill people. Viruses don’t give a shot about opinions they just work on fact.
Ah, now virus's can tell the difference? "
Tell the difference? No of course it can’t it doesn’t care what your reasons are .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd.
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point. "
Now that sounds perfectly reasonable and I'll probably get slated for agreeing with you. One size definitely doesn't fit all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
"
Again, quite right but there's lots on here who don't want anyone to have an opinion other than theirs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
Again, quite right but there's lots on here who don't want anyone to have an opinion other than theirs "
Thats exactly it which is why I find this thread rather ironic.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think lots of people are trying to dress up ‘opinion’ to justify breaking lockdown rules to satisfy their own personal needs. Opinions aren’t valid when it comes down to lockdown as your ‘opinion of your need’ is literally life or death to someone else. If you’re going to be selfish and not follow rules just own it abs say you care more about yourself than anyone else - simple.
I haven't mentioned anything about rules and guidelines, but that seems to be your focal point regardless. The post was about what people consider essential for their situation being labelled by others not in their situation as a selfish need or that they are simply whining for privilege.
Because often they are.
Just because somebody considers something essential doesn't mean it is and people are allowed to disagree with that.
And just because someone considers it non essential for THEIR own circumstance it does not give them the right to attempt to shame others for their requirements.
Again, quite right but there's lots on here who don't want anyone to have an opinion other than theirs
Thats exactly it which is why I find this thread rather ironic.
"
Most threads are tbf. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd.
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point.
Now that sounds perfectly reasonable and I'll probably get slated for agreeing with you. One size definitely doesn't fit all "
.
Slate me too then. Again, to break it down once more... I think that where welfare and support is in the equation for not strict adherence, I would take a balanced view. Where the reason for breaking the rules is for pleasure, that is where I draw the line. But I think sometimes we need to allow for commonsense. Though on the flip side to that, not everyone has commonsense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd.
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point.
Now that sounds perfectly reasonable and I'll probably get slated for agreeing with you. One size definitely doesn't fit all .
Slate me too then. Again, to break it down once more... I think that where welfare and support is in the equation for not strict adherence, I would take a balanced view. Where the reason for breaking the rules is for pleasure, that is where I draw the line. But I think sometimes we need to allow for commonsense. Though on the flip side to that, not everyone has commonsense. "
F
If you are supporting a vulnerable person concerned for someone's welfare then you are not breaking the rules because they are covered in the exemptions so nobody has an issue with that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd.
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point.
Now that sounds perfectly reasonable and I'll probably get slated for agreeing with you. One size definitely doesn't fit all .
Slate me too then. Again, to break it down once more... I think that where welfare and support is in the equation for not strict adherence, I would take a balanced view. Where the reason for breaking the rules is for pleasure, that is where I draw the line. But I think sometimes we need to allow for commonsense. Though on the flip side to that, not everyone has commonsense.
F
If you are supporting a vulnerable person concerned for someone's welfare then you are not breaking the rules because they are covered in the exemptions so nobody has an issue with that. "
OK, let me give an example. Let's say my friend's Internet isn't working. She doesn't know how to fix it and doesn't know anyone else who can. I am not in her bubble but she lives nearby. Without it her kids cannot participate in their online learning nor have a distraction which their ipad or Sky provides.
A real life example. I was throwing the rubbish out but I had managed to lock myself out. I had left my phone inside. I went to my exes house without being able to contact her first in the hope that she still had a spare key.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sorry, in first example I was meant to add what are people's views on me going to fix it... In case it didn't make sense. "
I would try and fix it over the phone with her, video call or alike.
My boiler was playing up during first lockdown and with a mixture of chat, photos and videos a friend helped me troubleshoot the problem |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think perspectives have become dichotomised: on the one hand about freedom and rights of the individual and on the other moral responsibilities to the collective. As each takes their side they become more like each other in the way they vilify each other. One is the shadow of the other, each denying that the other is part of them. Both are filed by fear and anxieties. Constructive dialogue, based on mutual inquiry backed with transparent evidence and data, while working out what actions serve the most needs best while remaining legitimate, are what is sorely needed. However currently we are just all caught in the crossfire of clashing worldviews.
Tolerance of each other’s perspectives in order to understand each other is a good start point, but all perspectives are still partial truths, and seeking truths that serve the greatest good based on the variety of needs people have, is the most integrated way work through the conficts.
We all need to remember that while we are whole persons with rights and needs, we are are also part of a greater whole to which we have responsibilities. And that greater whole is also a part and so on all the way to the infinite. Needs, rights and responsibilities up and down the chain of being.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are many people on here that seem to believe that because certain things do not fit their view of how to treat this situation that they are entitles to state that all things outside of their own personal condition and requirements are simply excess, unnecessary and that people who do not agree due to their own circumstances are selfish...
However that in itself is selfish. Just because YOU don't need to have or do a certain thing, it doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.
Everyone has their own personal dilemmas and situations, needs and requirements. Slating them because they are different to yours is not enlightened or educated, it's just an alternate selfishness.
Is there a greater good in dealing with covid19?
And again, this post isn't to do with rules or combating the virus. Refer to my comment about shoes.
I would disagree with your opinion, I think there is a common good when dealing with this virus. That shared aim requires compromise from all of us. The actions of one individual acting in pursuit of their own wants and needs can affect the lives of many others.
Two of the issues are compounding reducing the transmission of covid19. One is the belief that opinion is equivalent to fact and the other is the amount of disinformation regarding covid19.
To accuse people of an alternate selfishness when they are acting in pursuit of a common goal is
simply, odd.
You are missing the point, this isn't about lockdowns or the virus or rules, it's about the attitude of people who see themselves as some shining example of what a model citizen should look like right now, trying to shame people in completely different situations and trying to speak as if their own personal situation should fit all and fuck them if it doesn't.
Example, one person saying the only things that should be open are supermarkets and chemist's based off of their own needs, slating people that point out other shops that THEIR personal situation and circumstance requires to be open.
I'm saying it isn't one size fits all like a lot of people on here keep saying it is, and refusal to see that it isn't is a self absorbed and blinkered view point.
Now that sounds perfectly reasonable and I'll probably get slated for agreeing with you. One size definitely doesn't fit all .
Slate me too then. Again, to break it down once more... I think that where welfare and support is in the equation for not strict adherence, I would take a balanced view. Where the reason for breaking the rules is for pleasure, that is where I draw the line. But I think sometimes we need to allow for commonsense. Though on the flip side to that, not everyone has commonsense. "
Totally agree |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t think there is any ambiguity ... if you’re not following the rules you’re doing it for selfish reasons. I’d like to hear any examples of ‘non selfish’ bending of the rules ....
Dominic Cummings...according to him!"
Oh dear , oh dear, oh dear. So last year |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *.D.I.D.A.SMan
over a year ago
London/Essex... ish... Romford to be exact |
"Sorry, in first example I was meant to add what are people's views on me going to fix it... In case it didn't make sense.
I would try and fix it over the phone with her, video call or alike.
My boiler was playing up during first lockdown and with a mixture of chat, photos and videos a friend helped me troubleshoot the problem "
My example was based on an actual real life situation with my colleague who was unable to login remotely for work. He is a technophobe. His mobile plan only had 1gb/month if I remember as he used WiFi at work and at home so I've no idea if his data would have stretched to a video call anyway. In any case, he was too worried he'd press the wrong button and everything would have taken an age. Bottom line, he is quite cautious and we sanitised our hands and his laptop, wore masks throughout and kept our distance. All was sorted in 10 minutes.
And don't mention the boiler! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There are going to be some things said that are incorrect, others that may be dangerous, some just used to inspire harassment or argument but we owe it to each other to be civil and respectful when engaging. The 'incorrect' could include the likes of the 5G, Bill Gates etc
At the absolute minimum we should follow Fab rules but we can each make effort to attempt to make each of our engagements with others an absolute pleasure. Having high standards for ourselves is never a bad thing. I've certainly made mistakes when I've said things and I hope that I've learned well enough to do better for others. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"the saddest thing i heard in all this was an elderly chronically ill lady upset that her Christmas plans had been disrupted with her family. She has less than a year to live and will never get another one and possibly may die alone now.. is our collective selfish fear of death responsible for her lonely death?
d
Why was she not in a bubble? She needed not to have been alone ... it’s awful how many elderly people are suffering for many reasons throughout all this. This is more reason that people need to stick to the rules so the limited time these people have left isn’t spent in lockdown
no this is the product of fear. i guess one of her family members may have been in her bubble but not all.. that's several family members she may never see again just because it would be breaking the rules. Like her, id rather die. I've been working on the front line so have seen all sorts but a lot of it is frankly ridiculous. Like the laws that presented this lady from having one last family Christmas. my mum is crippled with dementia and can't remember her grandchildrens names.. i broke the rules a few times to help and i believe if i hadn't she wouldn't know who i was either
d"
The only thing I dare say I would have done, was get everyone tested prior to it. Just for peace of mind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
People have always had their own agenda, whether it is to with the guidelines during a light lockdown, to speed limits on our roads, or leaving a laptop in hold luggage and denying it is there.
It is not seen as an act of selfishness, or stupidity. As the person has convinced themselves this is what they believe, regardless of if it is right or wrong. They will get nasty when you challenge them, as you are attacking them and what they believe in.
With regards to covid, look at the people who have denied that it exists, only to die of it later. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *lk GuyMan
over a year ago
sheffield |
The machine is working
For years it’s happened you’ve got divid people get the blame game going and always someone else fault
Without knowing the facts of someone acting
Example if I don’t wear a mask I’m killing people
But without asking me if I’ve got a health condition
And if they looked and listen and read it states with asthma I don’t need wear one but they’ve scared people so much and their ignorance to understand the reason for someone action |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
