Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
VenusnMars
Over 90 days ago
Straight Female, 54
Straight Female, 83

Forum

Quote by Libra-Love
rotflmao Venus you daft cow...you're not GHC! :lol2:
:giggle:

Crap! Just figured it out! I wondered what the acronym was for, but was too embarrassed to ask! :shock:
I was going through the lot.........
GSOH
VGSOH
TTFN.....etc....etc.......
That`ll learn me! rotflmao
Venusxxx
Quote by Libra-Love
GHC you are a lot quieter (and a dinky little thing you are too lol) than I expected you to be, unless that's just that I didn't give you chance to get a word in edgeways :lol2:

Christ! Which Munch was that then?! I must have been pretty nervous for me to be quiet! rotflmao
Venusxxx
Quote by Rainbows
Venus- I actually met you before I had a chance to formulate an opinion!!! (I can see Venus scratching her head now and going "I met you?"!! confused ).

Oh crap, you did?! :shock: I`m sorry, it takes a few munches before people sink in..so to speak :shock: redface . I`m normally so busy flitting from one person to another.....noone stays put redface
I was ok wasn`t I? Wasn`t throwing up in anything was I?! Please god tell me I wasn`t in `Trisha` mode.... :scared: :uhoh:
Venusxxx
Or, we could just adopt the attitude my mother was brought up with.....
`Do not question the ways of the Lord!`
How conveniant :huh:
Venusxxx
I was having an interesting PM session the other day, when the subject of pictures we build of people here arose. I have to admit, although with most I don`t tend to think beyond their Avatar, I did have a pre-conceived idea of what Eager would look like, and it was very different to the reality of the man! Perhaps even a little blinkered of me too! I imagined him to look like one of the brothers from `Bros` rotflmao
Thought it might be fun for those who haven`t already met to share their pre-conceived ideas, if they have any! :mrgreen:
Venusxxx
Ok, read the thread. I like being small for me......I enjoy not being medium because I love attention, I really do! :mrgreen: I won`t however place too much value upon appreciation given via superficial means only. I need people to like me for what is inside also. Over a period of two years I did once put on three stone. It didn`t suit me at all so I lost it, I just didn`t have the build to carry it off and make it look attractive. Attraction is always going to be part visual, so I don`t disregard the fun that being seen as attractive brings. I love it! As should larger people whose size visually appeals to others. Health is something that should always be a consideration of course, for both large and small.
I agree with Ice, after so many years of enduring the Westernised Ideal of beauty, sometimes it does feel like the BBW are reciprocating the same attitude in retaliation. I`ve read many a celebratory articles aimed at larger women, which will involve comments concerning `bag of bone women`, or `stick insects`. Sad really, for the capability in enjoying your own body should be found independantly of having to do this. Both `camps` are guilty of derogatory remarks, I just hope that the SH membership are capable of being above this. After all it`s the unprejudiced attitude I thought existed here which keeps bringing me back.
Venusxxx
I love to see people from both ends of the spectrum enjoy their size, certainly there are areas I`d improve personally, but none of these are down to my height (or lack thereof), or my being not being buxom. I love being little. I love the way guys dangle me when they meet me at munches lol, and I love being able to have the mindset that is able to celebrate the perks being small brings!
In a BDSM world where much of the emphasis is upon tall dominant women, I am going to have sooo much fun trying to be `Venus the mini dom` at Blue`s party! :bounce:
Now I`ve said that, I go back and actually read the thread shall I?
Venusxxx
Quote by Ice Pie
Some concepts are definitely forever beyond the grasp of certain people.
God created everything.
Including hell.
God is Good.
Nope, sorry, I don't get it.
I guess I'm just not as intelligent as religious people. dunno

/wipes brow
If you carry on posting like that Ice, then I might just survive! rotflmao
Venusxxx
Quote by Ghostie
That is debatable! rotflmao
Venusxxx

By whom? Why would you choose to belive that of yourself? :twisted:
:giggle::giggle: :giggle:
If I were stupid I might....... lol
Venusxxx
Quote by GenHertsCpl
Has any other mums gone thought this, is this an age thing, is this a 'left my career to have kids' thing, or is this something else??
Any advice is gratefully accepted redface

It`s a going `stir crazy` thing because you need some extra stimulation...nope, can`t relate one little bit! wink
The thing I think you need to ask yourself before embarking on an OU course is are you self-disiplined enough to undertake one? Personally, I know I wouldn`t be. I need the direction and organisation of a College environment. There are easier courses to teeth on which can be done online. Perhaps a subject you have never had the opportunity to study previously, at a lower level?
The only reason I suggest this is because I tried a very demanding college course when I had one toddler at home. It demanded at least 16 hours of homework a week and I failed miserably, the fallout from this is not something I`d wish to experiance again.
Whats wrong with me, this isnt me AT ALL!! Im now worrying cos i might ruin my precious friendships and their image of me as bubbly, sexy, good fun, best mate is shattered

Poppycock! Feeling like this is a reality of life and can happen to anyone. I never did understand the stigma attached to feeling down. (well I do, but it`s based in bullshit ;) )
Venusxxx
Quote by Ghostie
Why would you choose to believe that of yourself? ..

If I had already chosen to believe that, then this thread would not exist. ;)
Venusxxx
Quote by little gem
I think it`s an entirely different matter to not want to grasp a concept because personal morality prevents you from wanting to,

Ahhh, but that was my above point about IQ's and the link between grasping concepts. There are other things such as morality and agreement that do cloud some people's thought processes. It can be enough to distort the concept into what they want it to be and thereby destroying the original thing they were trying to grasp, kind of making the whole thing a bit pointless really.
To be able to fully understand someone elses concept does one not engage their abilty to empathise or put themselves in the theorists shoes, so to speak, in order to grasp the concept fully? If these personal skills are flawed then the way the person interprets the concept will be regardless of their IQ as they refuse to understand due to lack of emotional intelligence. How many times does one get mental blocks about things saying we "can't do it". The rational brain processes would say if another approach was given then the target was acheivable. This lack of rationality is often linked with emotion, so the grasping of concepts can also have an emotional barrier to learning too.
Ok, that makes perfect sense. So, can a concept be grasped by someone who is prepared to look outside of their moral conditioning, irrespective of intelligence (not IQ) without a subject becoming so dumbed down it loses cohesion?
It certainly seems possible to look beyond moral conditioning. When I was a young teen the popular opinion I lived around was that homosexuality and masturbation was wrong. As I grew up I certainly wasn`t prepared to accept these prejudices` without exploring the concepts further, and as a result I am a much better person for doing so. Yet even now there are other things which do not sit comfortably with me......but I am aware that the world comes in all shades of grey, so I do not prejudice, I tend to assume that these things are merely beyond my understanding for now. However, I would like to be in a position not to take this stance based on the `benefit of the doubt`, purely because I might not be capable of `getting it`.
Venusxxx
Quote by Ghostie
I think (wth Venus's agreement of course) that if you substitute intelligence (a generalisation) for IQ (a flawed measurement of intelligence) then we're back on track...(Just chunking up again...) ;)

That would be far more accurate thank you. smile
I really do have to watch this film....it`s his birthday, and I said I would! Arggggh, just as it was getting really interesting!
It`s `The Day after Tomorrow` so consider me well dumbed down by the time I get back lol
Venusxxx
Quote by little gem
I disagree with the notion that any concept can be conveyed regardless of IQ. I saw the example first hand last night.
My mother is quite and intelligent lady, I reckon her IQ is quite high average (around 110/120) but she didnt understand the fundamental concept that I am open to new ideas and will try a few things that she would never do. She also couldn't grasp that me buying a ballgag and some nipple clamps on ebay does not make me a whore. dunno
I suppose it goes back to the old nature or nurture thing as to whether someone can be taught a concept regardless of IQ. Do we learn from our surroundings and experiences or is it pre-programmed genetically? I agree with Ghostie's theory that the "dumbing down" of a concept can make the original concept fundamentaly flawed as important chunks of the original concept may be lost in translation. This is something that we can see in translations of literature where one language has a particular word which means something to them but the word chosen for translation has different conotations for us.

I think it`s an entirely different matter to not being able to grasp a concept because personal morality prevents you from wanting to, but do agree that Ghosties theory does hold water. I suppose the subject would have to be dumbed down, and then the level raised in managable chunks from there.....bit like school really! Unfortunately I don`t have room for school.
Gem, you are not a whore, you are an animal!
That said, perhaps it wasn`t one of my best moves when I posted on a Philosophy forum and told them that thier subject didn`t seem to leave much room for common sense.......
:uhoh:
In the nicest possible way of course! :mrgreen:
Off to watch a film!
Venusxxx
Thankyou Ghostie smile
Well, after reading up on what Philosophy actually is, I`m not entirely convinced the subject leaves much room for common sense...... :uhoh:
Venusxxx
Quote by little gem
Well we could always put him in my new bit of kit I bought on ebay tonight! biggrin
:bounce: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
;)

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
Blue!!!! I just discovered another boundery! That thing is not coming within ten feet of me! :scared:
Venusxxx
Psssst, Dave, has she told you you are likely to get a stinking cold too....... :uhoh:
Venusxxx
Quote by Sgt Bilko
bolt

YES!!! I`ve reduced him down to one emoticon! :bounce: :thrilled: :evil2: :taz: :karaoke: :smug:
I now feel like I`ve acheived something!
Goodnight! :mrgreen:
Venusxxx
Quote by Sgt Bilko
banghead banghead banghead banghead banghead banghead banghead
No!!! You've started her off again!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: lol lol lol lol

Perhaps it would be prudent at this point to highlight the differences between irrational and subjective?
Eg. A good example of subjective would be any of the posts I make when I am trying to think. A good example of irrational would be the above quote. :mrgreen:
Venusxxx
Quote by martie
Morality -
Surely it is objective according to Kant's reasoned description of the Categorical Imperative.
This makes sense as a subjective morality allows us all to decide what we want to do, making societal cohesion impossible.

Yet if extending morality is to cater for other people`s feelings, which are by nature subjective, then surely pure reason would not apply? Morality alone would dictate that we do not do what we want to do, we would let feeling determine this, not reason.
Venusxxx
Quote by rogerthedragon
You've all got it wrong, the idea is that if you could see in 4 dimensions you would see time. Therefore a "cat" as a 4 dimensional object is everthing from when it was conceived to when it dies - the reason it looks a bit like a carrot is because as it gets older it gets bigger (At least to start with)
Of course this image ignores the fact that the cat moves about so maybe a 4 dimensional cat would look more like a timelapse photo of car headlights as it would exist in every place it had been in its entire life.
Roger the Dragon cool

I don't go along with that. Seeing a two-dimensional object in three dimensions does not allow you to see the entire duration of its existence. Besides, the matter that the cat is composed of exists before it is born and continues to exist after it dies, so you would see more than just the cat.
Surely time is the first dimension, not the fourth dimension? Nothing can exist without time, and therefore even one-dimensional and two-dimensional objects need to include time as a dimension?
Did you have to reply? :confused: lol
The matter of seeing the whole existance depends on whether time is transparent or opaque - if you view a two dimensional glass tumbler in 3 dimensions you can see the entire object. As far as viewing the matter that makes up the cat after the cat has died - I was considering the cat to be a singular entity and therefore to have a distinct temporal start and end.
As far as which is the first dimension that surely irrelevant as numbers are merely a human way of quantifying abstract concepts - the dimensions of space and time still exist even to someone who cannot count.
Roger the Dragon cool
Can`t someone do Kant?! :shock:
Bilko, you are not taking this at all seriously are you? :dry:
Venusxxx
Yes, I know he never posts, but he reads and there are enough of you here who know him to wish Mars a happy birthday! :mrgreen:
Happy Birthday pet :rose:
That woman by the PCxxx