Quite.
Well, exactly. Those kids had quite the example
Let's face it, if there are people demanding obedience to their own world view with no tolerance for questioning their values, they're pretty obviously not succeeding in their aims.
Seen this many times. In my last job the functional Executive Committee I was majority female and led by a woman. Some of the interactions between females were awful………victimisation, bullying and long term bearing of grudges between certain female individuals often made life (work) difficult for the rest of us.
Nothing a good slap on the backside by the filing cabinet wouldn’t solve. With a tim tum tiddly tum and a ripping good time had by all!! Baaaaah!
One of my female colleagues was treated so badly by her 'senior' female colleagues she has left her job. She called it 'women punching down'. An extremely talented researcher and gifted teacher, now progressing her career at a different London university.
We can’t allow any poo pooing Darling
Oh Nonsense Blackadder! This empire was built on poo-pooing!
Aside from physically, it appears every other aspect of Greggy stopped developing at around 13 years old.
It certainly worked for the nonce Edwards and got him a ridiculously short non-custodial sentence. I have little doubt Wallace will be playing his "I've got mental health" card before too long.
Yep, act like a kunt and then pull the old MH card, works every time !
Keep up at the back... the sentencing was in-line with guidelines and similar to other offenders sentences. He has come out with the MH card, he was sexually assaulted as a kid...
It always bewilders me when these terms which portray a positive characteristic are used as a term of derision or ridicule, like 'do gooder".... which implies that it's a negative trait to want to do good.
He never has.
Being found innocent does not mean you are not guilty, it just means that you have gone through a system of testing the evidence of the claim against you. I would be happy with the slogan listen to the accuser, but believe the victim is essentially saying guilty until proven innocent, which I will never support. As I stated the court system is far from perfect, but if you then require the defendant to prove their innocence it gets far worse. The very statement that you make "does not mean we won't believe the victims until something has been through court" is essentially you saying you agree with guilty until proven innocent, even if that is not what you think it most certainly is the result of such a statement.
I have simply answered questions. If you are incapable of reading the preceding question and then my following answer, that is hardly my fault.