f13.net

Cause he was exploiting animals and also a male. Or something like that

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14694683/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14694683/)

Misleading thread title:



Germaine Greer is really much funnier than she sounds in that article though.

Let's not leave this out.

Or this gem:


I mean come on. And there are the other gems in the article, like her little rant about Lord of the Rings.

Besides, here is an article straight from Australia which quotes much more of her thoughts on it:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20365256-5008780,00.html (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20365256-5008780,00.html)

She sounds like a liberal version of Coulter.  I wish the press would stop giving these people RL trolls attention.

I didn't realize Australia was financing and producing the Crocodile Hunter series. Or are they responsible for not ridding their country of all those nasty, wicked creatures once and for all.

That is a pretty good line. I give credit where it's due.

She's been trolling for almost 50 years. If you were going to complain about press attention, you should have done it a long time ago.

She's no Coulter though. Big difference being that she's intentionally satirical.

On of the things I quite like about people like Greer is that she uses inflammatory remarks to taunt people who are opposed to feminism out of the woodwork. That's a good way to have bigots expose themselves. For example, rather than simply point out that Greer was bashing somebody unfairly, Riggs decided to state that a feminist was bashing somebody, and that it was probably because he was a man. That's gold dust.

Ann Coulter is not so useful. Opponents to hard-line Republican Party sentiment are to be expected and even lauded in the artificial theatre of partisan politics, and exposing them gets us nothing of value.

Get off your highhorse Righ and fuck yourself with it while you're at it.

There are basically two groups of feminists, those out to protect women's rights and equality  and those who believe men are so bad that the word woman should be spelled womyn or some such. She struck me as the later type. Have you done any research on her? I have, she's the classic Feminazi as some people would call it.

Jesus, you really need to get the fuck over yourself, this isn't the first post you've gone off half-cocked and talked shit without any god damn clue about me or whoever else you're speaking of.

Hardly the classic "feminazi". She even recommends that women don't burn their bras!

Her main focus of attack has always been the "nuclear family", and the identity of females in it (it's not like she's attacking MEN themselves. She loves men. She was rock star groupie back in the day, for heaven's sake). And besides, the nuclear family is relatively recent invention to American social life. It's not the age old tradition of "family values" (here or abroad) many people think it is.


Ahem.

I may have been wrong about her Stray from what you said. That still doesn't make me any less angry with Righ's high horse antics and bullshit.

Posting in page one of an epic thread thread destined to be identical to every thread with "feminist" in its title since the beginning of the internet.

Does every thread have to turn nasty today?

Being an asshole is the new way to be cool.  Didn't you get the memo?

That explains all the press folks get for being asshats right after someone's died.  If you're a decent human, when someone who's not a shithead dies you give a grieving period before you even think of tearing them up and down.  This sort of shit is attention whoring on a tele-strider level.  Fuck these people.

I might have if you'd posted a link to an article by MSNBC about her here, almost 50 years ago.  Since you didn't this is the best we have.


Are you saying she's better than Coulter for trying to reap personal benefit via ridiculing a celebrity due to his death, or that she's better than Coulter for doing so intentionally?

She's not ridiculing a celebrity's death. She's ridiculing, what she considers, the exploitative spectacle that was his career -- while he was alive (note, I don't really think that of him myself. Those are her words).

Again I quote:


Get mad at her for that, if anything. Not some imagined situation whereby she jumps for joy at the death of another human being.


[edit] Wait, why am I explaining this for you anyways? It's not like you care.

Show me where she was saying this, this publicly, this loudly about him prior to his death and I'll conceed she's not some ghoulish attention whore.

Until then, she's a shitheel.

Ok, she didn't ridicule his death.  Seems correct, although I'm uncertain why you'd mention it as I haven't.

So your vote is that she's riducling his career and that the timing she used was because of, owing to, attributed to, or able to be credited to (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=due+to), the timing of his death and that's why she's better than Coulter?  I think they're both jackals but maybe you're right.

Meh, my bad.  Ignore.

I think the article made me mad because it did remind me of a Liberal Ann Coulter attempt to get attention. I mean, he's only been dead for a few days and she's already writing an article saying that nature struck back and he got what he deserved.

I'm not mad really because I care personally about the Croc Hunter, but I am mad because his wife and kids may hear about this and really, can she not wait a month or two? It's just...evil somehow to attack someone publically like this so soon after his death. I honestly don't care what she personally thinks about him or what she says to friends and coworkers. I do care what she prints for all the world, including his family, to see so soon after his death.

This is the most retarded statement I've seen on the Internet in at least 7 minutes.  What organizational structure, pray tell, has most of history subscribed to?  If anything, in the past there was even MORE emphasis on family as the basic social structure as in many societies three or more generations of the same family lived under one roof.  Is this where you say up until Republicans were in power the basic social unit was polyamorous free-love drum circle compounds?

The extended family. Along with random jackass villagers. You answered your own question.

The term nuclear family indicates mom, dad and kids. That's why it was invented. "Extended family" is not the same thing.

Being against the nuclear family does not mean being against the family. The problem with the nuclear family is that there isn't a lot of wiggle-room - dad is the bread-winner and mom cooks dinner. Or maybe both parents work and kids are stuck with Mexican nanny. Or dad stays home and becomes butt of Mr. Mom jokes.

In an extended family things are a lot more flexible as aunt, grammy etc can watch the kids. And those old biddies are probably retired anyway and have nothing better to do.

We are approching full moon so everybody is getting a bit tense.

Let no man say I don't get into the spirit of things :

Fuck you all.

So she's a jack-ass with no appreciation for cause and effect?  Much better.

It's very nice to say that strong local support groups of extended families are better than mom, dad, kids when it comes to raising a family but there are HUGE factors that have made the situation the way it is.  Such as, sit here and starve with all your relatives or move portions of the family around the country where they can support themselves.

It's like saying it's nice to be happy and rich rather than just be happy.  Well, no shit.

You guys are being a bit snippy with each other today.  If you want, I can give you a convient Two Minutes' Hate to reinforce the board's social cohesion?  Some overly broad generalization about a heterogenous group, perhaps?  Oh wait, you guys are already beating me to the punch this time.

The Andrea Dworkins and Catherine MacKinnons on the radical fringe of feminism only constitute their own "wing" of feminism in three places; in their minds, in the gender studies departments at some universities, and (perhaps most importantly) in the minds of conservative pundits opposed to feminism who have everything to gain by promoting voices that the average feminist finds abhorrent.

When faced with someone who talks about how all sex is rape, unless of course it's between two appropriately militant womyn, there's no reason you have to call them a feminist just because they call themselves that.  And no, 'feminazi' doesn't count as drawing a distinction, as the people who really brought that portmanteau into popular circulation are the same ones who unfairly tarred perfectly normal women like Hillary Clinton with it, and buying into the term helps give their worldview currency in some small way.

I don't see why radical feminists have to be debated and denounced every time stuff like this comes around - you don't write a denouncement on a message board of the guy ranting at you about the plates in his head next to the supermarket, so why bother with these clowns?  They're both equally inconsequential in mainstream American life, but it aids the theoconservative/paleoconservative wing of the Republican party to pretend like radical 'feminists' are lurking in the wings at every turn.

True feminism is not controversial and not debateable except by far-right zealots (Hi, Mr. Pope!).

The only point of lumping in radical yahoos into the term 'feminist' (whether it's done explicitly or more often, implicitly by association) is to discredit the term.  They're feminists in the same way that Fred Phelps is a Democrat.

Well, first off, radical anything tends to get debated and denounced. And if you think people don't write about the guy with plates in his head you've been on the wrong message boards. There is however, also a big difference. Usually, the dude with plates in his head isn't writing editorials or publishing books or otherwhise seeking publicity. Unless he's on that new Genesis talk radio station. (New in my area, I think it's been around for awhile in other parts of the country.)

And these radical yahoos are called feminists because that is what they call themselves much like Phelps (who is a despicable man in every sense of the word and scares me. Seriously.) calls himself a Christian and a Democrat. And honestly, much like anything else, it is usually the yahoos who get the publicity. So, like any other group (whether it be political or religious or both) Feminists sometimes have to deal with the image problem caused by their radical fringe element.

In any case, I'm already labeled a sexist bigot because of my reaction to Greer. *shrugs* I guess I could've put Feminist in quotes when referring to her but I assumed people knew that when referring to someone like her the word Feminist referred to the radical variety. Oh well, as Samuel L Jackson would say fuck it and fuck them.

Feminazis are just chauvinists without a cock.

Feminists...leave the toilet seat up and see how much equality they have.

I've never actually met a woman who cares what you do with the toilet seat.  Is that just an old saw, or is there really some truth to it?

Stop being retarded.

Grew up with a mom and 2 sisters.  They all yelled at me for it.

Had a roomate in college (female) that would yell about it too.

My wife would lecture me the few times I forgot and she ended up with a wet ass in the middle of the night.  And I mean, very few times since I was already in the habit of putting it back down from growing up in house full of women.

I'd guess 99% of the women I've known in my life care. 

My way of getting back?  I shut all the lids.  That way we all have to lift at least one lid to go.  They'll just get a cold seat rather than a wet one.  :evil:

Install a urinal.  Problem solved.

I care, too, but fortunately my roommates came pre-trained.  Both lids are fine with me, it's how I do it.  Definately way better than a wet ass, a string of profanities, and being shocked fully awake at four in the morning.

You know, the only issue I have with the seat up/down argument is why does it default to being the man's responsibility? He likes it up, she likes it down. Men have to check if the seat is up before pissing, why can't women be responsible for checking if it is down?

BTW, both lids down works fine until somebody gets violently ill in the middle of the night. Then you usually have a nasty mess to clean up.

I have never fallen into a toilet in my life. Why? I check to see where the seat is BEFORE I SIT DOWN. It isn't rocket surgery.

I suppose there are two types of people in the world: Those who check, and those who don't. For some, the "going to the toilet" procedure is a serene, unattentive experience. For others, it's one of vigilance.

It just so happens that many women fall under the former category (is it chauvinist to say that?).

Easily solved. If you share a room/house with the opposite sex, assume the other person will be using the toilet next and leave the seat accordingly.

Or have pre-potty trained children, in which case all toilets should have seat locks on them.

I think pretty much every girlfriend I have ever had, and there have been a lot, has always bitched about this. I always answer with WAPs reply. I just dont get it. ITS NOT HARD TO CHECK.

Have you been looking at my home improvements notebook? Once I get a house, I'm all about a urinal. My stepdad had one in the workshop, which I thought was maybe pushing it a bit.

Most girls I know seem not to check, either. I see that as their defect, not mine for catering to their lack of awareness. At work, where they gripe about leaving it down, I put both down. I'm still in my bachelor pad at home, so she is good about leaving the seat up (though I make her do that as a joke, mostly). I've bitched at some of my married friends who go in to piss an put the seat down when they leave. Goddamned pussified husbots.

When the girl and I move in together, it'll be a pretty easy rule: leave it how you used it. She's got common sense, my gal.

That is an awesome solution. However, I've noticed it usually goes one way. "Damn it you left the seat up!" and yet most times when a man walks into the bathroom the lid is down.

Maybe it's just the women I've known in my life or something.

All our lids are down, just because we don't want the cat drinking out of them. As a whole, however, I am firmly in the 'Look before you leap' camp.

How often do people get violently ill in the middle of the night?  I can't remember the last time that happened to anyone I know since I became an adult and learned to avoid becoming toxic from alcohol.  Sure, someone might become ill enough to lose control due to some sort of health crisis, but who takes that into account when looking at the toilet seat?  We have three toilets.  They all came with a seat and a lid.  We mostly use them both... as God intended.   :-P  I only bother to look if we have visitors because my husband is extremely considerate.  I can't remember him EVER not remembering to be considerate in that respect.

Again though, why is the onus on him? Sure, that's considerate of him but it's a one way consideration. How is that fair?

It's not one way.  We're both rather considerate people.  He's taller than me but I make sure I shut the cupboard doors  so he doesn't bang his head when he walks through the kitchen.  I remember when I was very young, my grandmother was not so considerate.  She was barely 5' tall.   She left cupboards open all the time and my very tall grandfather would get smacked in the face now and then.  He had been a pro boxer and was rather "punchy" so when that happened he would have some sort of mental breakdown and start punching up the house... people, too, if someone was near enough.  I think she did it on purpose though... she HATED my grandfather.

Anyway, the moral is:  Shut the lid, Riggsy, or there could be a cupboard door in the face for you! (http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/boxer.gif)

But damnit it's not fair. You've got potential energy on your side. Think how much more effort it is to put the toilet seat up when you really need to go!

That's the beer talking, duckie.

We get to squat, do a 360°, and risk a bath.  Men get to look their target in the eye and usually get splash damage anyways if not outright miss.  Heaven forbid they wipe the damn rim afterwards.

I don't know about your households, but guess who gets to clean that crap up in mine, or my parents, or any of my friends?  Talk about nasty messes... :|

So a lot of girls really don't check before they sit down? That's unbelievable to me, but as I've lived with relatively few women, I'll certainly defer to you all's experience.

I've always just done the 'all the lids all the way down' thing.  Makes the bathroom a bit nicer looking that way.

Wow, glad I kept reading this post...the derail is way better than the original subject matter.

Now, I am firmly in the "seat goes down" camp.  I've never thought about why, I've just always put it down.  That said, I have to wonder at the logic of this, especially since hearing the reasoning coming from the ladies.  Are you really not checking?  Is that why we have to put it down?  Have you really given yourself a butt-bath that way?  If so, that is shocking.   As Riggswolfe asked, why should the onus be on the male?  Let's examine the possibilities arising from BOTH male and female viewpoints.  Imagine the consequences if neither sex checks the positioning of the lids:

- Female perspective (both lids up):  In Lantyssa's words, you risk a 360° and a bath.  I don't even want to know about the 360° part.
- Male perspective (both lids down):  This is where it gets interesting.  If we do not check, the absolute best-case scenario is that we piss all over the closed toilet seat (got one of them nice fuzzy covers, do ya?).  Worst case?  In the middle of the night, the male often checks his aim by listening for the tell-tale sounds of falling urine splashing into the pool of water.  If he doesn't hear the all important tinkling sounds, he compensates.  No, he doesn't stop pissing to figure out what is going on - he will continue to adjust his aim until he believes is hitting the bullseye.  Now, you will not only have pee all over your fluffy seat cover, but God knows where else.  The floor.  The wall.  The bathroom scale.  The feet.  The cat?  Probably.  Depending on the male in question, he may not even register all this at 3am.  He might say to himself "that was odd...no tinkle! and then just go right back to bed.

I'll accept that the onus is on us and continue to put the seat down - heck, if nothing else, it looks nicer that way.   That doesn't mean it makes any sense.

I think the seat should be down all the time, even if I constantly have to lift it up.  I don't know why, I'm guessing because I naturally want open things closed, it seems like a better state to be in.  Leaving the lid up is akin to leaving the cap off the toothpaste, or having the medicine cabinet ajar.  It is a dirty dish still in the sink, a chair not pushed back under the dinner table, the TV left on with no one watching.

To derail further I am a very strong proponent of toilet paper being hung in the overhand manner.  It allows the piece of paper that you have to grab to be several inches closer to you.

Lantyssa's potty ritual sounds...interesting. Most women I know do a 180º and then squat...  :wink:
I do my best!

Miasma, I'm with you! Death to underhanders!

This kind of conversation is usually what passes for small talk with me. I'm not so good with the weather and politics, but a nice folded vs crumpled toilet paper debate? That's more like it.

Folded, of course. What kind of infidel crumples? That's for little kids who don't know any better. And overhand, always. always.

Anyone try baby wipes yet? I haven't worked up the courage or will to be so supremely wasteful. In the hunt to find the comedian who swears by them (I thought it was Chris Rock, I guess I'm mistaken!), I stumbled upon WAY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper) too much information.

I make sure my bathrooms are built for Righ comfort.  Comfy seat, paper over, and a nice little unit with a top and shelves containing candles, matches and something to read.  (I have to sort that bit out still)  It also gives him a surface on which to place his (le sigh) laptop.  I like having a comfy house. 

I must have the only husband in the world that doesn't pee standing up.  So the seat is down in our house all the time and I've never had to worry about taking a toilet butt-bath.  We've also just recently stopped keeping the lids down to keep the dog from drinking as well.  He seems to have stopped that habit, but I really didn't mind having to lift the lid at all.  Plus I think the room looks neater ("cleaner") with the lid down, especially since we have hard water and keeping the hardwater stains from the bowl is a freaking PITA.

I can't understand how people could miss checking if the seat/lid was up or down in the first place.  It's not like you aren't looking at the toilet when you walk into the room/stall in the first place.  You can't avoid looking at it!  So not seeing if the seat is up or down is just plain laziness.  And if you are constantly peeing in the dark or something like that, you have other problems.

Overhand all the way.  I can't stand playing "where's the end of the toilet paper" when it's underhand.  Plus, none of that cushy soft Charmin crap paper either.  I loathe toilet paper that shreds when you are wiping.  Scott tissue all the way.

Overhand is great until your cat figures out how to unroll herself 30' of playtoy, shreds it and drags it all over the house.

We get those water stains, too, and they really are a pain.  I'll put a bit of bleach in when I clean and it removes them right away, but they start up again within the week.  Those thingies you put in the tank are no use... except if you like the look of blue water.  I also keep a night light in all the bathrooms and hallways.  Our house is never completely dark. 



That is too cute.   :-)

I'll have to try the bleach option, or make sure the cleaner has bleach in it (thought it did, but who really knows).  Cleaner + toilet brush just doesn't seem to do the trick for up under the rim though, and I can see it when I'm cleaning.  I know the stains are there and it bugs me.  The blue water thing makes me think of my grandma's house, and fuzzy seat covers.

Indigo night lights are the best.  Cool blue glow and they last forever.  We've got some that are way over 5+ years old now, and they still work great.

I've found bleach works a lot better than all those cleaners, including the ones that say chlorox. In small letters somewhere it will say something like "does not contain bleach". Just flush, pour some (1 cup I think) in the bowl, wait 5m, do a quick run with the brush, flush, done.

I'm not sure why people are going away from the stuff that works. Anything that says "Warning: Corrosive!" like bleach has got to be better than something with no real warnings on it.

Now if I can only find something that can get my grout white again in the shower...

Whew. At first I thought the overhand/underhand debate was about wiping techniques. I was both horrified and filled with wonderment about some of the contortions it would take to perform an overhand wipe.

Great, now each time he posts I won't be able to stop myself from wondering if he was otherwise engaged... (http://img432.imageshack.us/img432/9638/toilet03in6.gif)

Using that same bleach soak some toilet paper in it and then fill in the TP/Bleach putty along your grout.  Wait an hour or two and remove, perfect white grout courtesy of USMC field day.


I use three squares of TP.  One up, one down and one to polish.

Interesting.. I tried a diluted bleach mixture but it didnt' seem to work.. do you have the ratio? do you cut the bleach? I assume you put as much tp in as you can until it starts to separate and then plaster it on, right?

My wife gets up in the middle of the night to go pee. She refuses to turn on the light when she does so she's gotten a few butt baths (and then let me know about it later). When I do occasionally leave the seat up, she'll bitch and moan for me to come in there and put it down for her. She doesn't want to put the seat down herself because she thinks its gross and the seat should be down anyway. Pointing out that her bare ass sits on that gross seat doesn't win any points. If I refuse to put the seat down (or she's not talking to me due to some other reason), she'll barely push the seat enough so it'll fall down with a crash. The woman is crazy, but I love her.

Under the rim is easy, too, with bleach.  Buy one of those bottles with the bent top or a spray bottle and use it for under the rim.  (don't miss and spray your face!)  Or... if you can find it... thick bleach already in a bottle with a bent top.  I use bleach and don't mix it with anything.  The ready made toilet cleaners, even though they say they contain bleach, don't work very well on those water stains.  I'M A FREAK.

The 360° was for the entire ritual.  Lift, spin, sit, spin, lower, parry, dodge, twang.  I'm also mostly having fun with it.  I always look unless I'm sick or so out of it that even conditioned responses get messed up.

No, I have never taken an unexpected bath although I have come close on one or two occassions.  To be serious for a second, I can't imagine toilet water is very healthy to be dipping oneself into.  Enhanced risk of bacteria and infections and might ruin a nice romantic tryst.  I mainly like the lid down because it looks nicer and I have had pets around for most of my life.

My cats rarely played with toilet paper for fun.  Only once or twice as kittens.  We did have one that if angry would do it on purpose to get back at us.  It was so funny we couldn't help but forgive him.

Perhaps the tone of my posts changes. Maybe I'm more cocksure. There, that was totally worth it.

In fact I find it better to have a more passive web experience when taking a dump. My preferences are science and technology news and window-shopping online CD stores.

Welcome to the Internet. You have all the resources in the world available to you, INCLUDING THE ACTUAL FUCKING ARTICLE (http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,1865124,00.html).

Hmmm.  On reading that article, it doesn't seem to say what you suggested it did.


It was, in fact, an interesting read.

The problem I have with it is that she wrote it about the father of two small children on the day their daddy died. That's heartless.

You really got that strawman by the balls! You go, girl!

This is the real thing that offends Greer.

He was a public figure and people will talk about him... good or bad, recluse or married with children.  I don't understand why that's a problem.  I can see disagreeing with what she said but not the fact that she said anything.  If Tom Cruise popped his clogs tomorrow I bet people would stand in line to talk about what a weirdo he was and not feel one bit guilty.  I'm sorry, I just don't get it. 

It's because I work in the Australian media and I've been using this pic (http://au.news.yahoo.com/060907/23/10fqq09/2862552713.html) all week. OK Signe, I'm just soft.

Wow, that article is nowhere near what the cherry picked quotes tried to make it out to be.  And there was not the slightest trace of any "feminist agenda".  Perhaps there was an animal rights agenda, but most of that article was full of facts about wildlife, the events of that day and going over legitimate criticism of some of Irwin's antics like feeding the crocodile with his baby.  Excluding the cheap shot at the end that was a reasonably fair article.

I don't know what to say about the timing of the article, on the one hand I think you should have some respect for the dead.  But when you get to be well known enough to actually warrant press coverage of your death I think it's natural that the obituary also mention your failings.  You can't write up a quick bio of Nixon and simply omit Watergate.

I feel the need to cherry pick some quotes myself.


Now all I need is an Australian who knows more about her to tell me if she was being sardonic...

That is a very sweet picture, definitely made to melt hearts. 

I'll take you off my "hard man" list and put you on my "old softie" list.  No worries, I even cry during really bad TV movies.    :oops:

My time has come!  I am the coolest man alive!

Are you sure you married a man?  Does he have any unexplainable scars?  Have you mercilessly destroyed his will to live to reduce him to such a sorry state?

Enquiring minds want to know.

I see the Marine Corps just breeds traitors who give away their secrets.  Well, I'm hanging on to my Brasso secrets like grim death.

ETA:  Incidentally, I'm sorry about the multiple posts.  I just respond away to whichever post catches my fancy.

Possibly.

However, it's also correct.  I'm not quite 'Speaker for the Dead' but I also believe in honesty after a death.  If people are hanging around my grave and saying what a wonderful chap I was, I'm coming out and punching someone.

I was REALLY annoyed at the other thread (and was glad to see it denned) because people came into a 'Death Sucks' thread to fuck about with a memorial.  Greer was not paid to do a memorial or an obituary, but write a column about the week's news.  Which she did.  Here's the REAL truth :

Life Goes On.

Those aren't positive quotes.  The first 2 are describing what other people think. Just trying to say some nice things to take the edge off the unpleasant things she is about to say.  The last seems disdainful,  "Crocodile Dundee"? lumping him in with an Australian stereotype from the eighties.   Hardly Irwin's fault that other people stereotype him.  His fault for not trying to hide it like Nicole Kidman and Mel Gibson.  "a superhuman generator of merchandise, books, interactive video-games and action figures"? hardly positive coming from a liberal especially when implied that it comes from the Dundee Stereotype.

 :roll:

Yes, I'm sure I married a man (no kids though, just one failed pregnancy as proof  :| ). He just prefers to sit down, I guess.  Nothing wrong with that, and I certainly don't miss having to worry about whether the seat is up or down or if his aim was off and he missed the bowl. 

Is he Swiss?

You're not doing your husband any favours by telling stuff like that about him to other men.

I'm thinking Prince Albert is involved.

I agree, but this rule is never, ever applied consistently.  We generally don't think twice about being critical on the day of the death when a story isn't pitched as a human interest story, for instance.

Personally I've got no trouble with people choosing to speak ill of the dead on this message board. I might think they're being a bit of an ass or overly harsh if it's someone I like but they're entitled to do it and can expect to be told to fuck off, etc. Doing it in print in a national newspaper days after someone has died is tacky though, the family of a celebrity are unlikely to frequent f13 but probably do read newspapers and I think leaving it a week or so shows a modicum of respect for them.

Which applies if the writer has a modicum of respect.

What if they clearly don't ?

I didn't mean for the dead celebrity to whatever but for the grieving widow and children, etc, etc. Give friends and family a week to start to get to grips with the loss before publicly trashing the guy. Greer isn't completely horrible here but seeing as Irwin's whole life seemed to be dedicated to animal conservation and he did seem to genuinely love them, saying he was being an attenion monger who poorly presented animals is probably going to sting for the family.

That was pretty much my whole problem with the article in a nutshell. I found it ironic she accused him of being an attention whore when she is the one using his death to get attention before his coffin is even in the ground.

It told me all I really needed to know about that woman, and reading some more information about her only sealed the deal. She reminds me alot of an English teacher I had that I hated and that probably doesn't help.

The full article is interesting in that it has some coherant thought as opposed to random snippets.  She's still a feminist (her self-claimed title), very liberal, trollish, ghoulish, and a mean spirited bitch in general.  She's using his death for personal gain, to push an agenda of animal rights when Irwin has far as I can tell done far more for animal conservation than she has.  She probably has some good ideas in her head, but she couldn't do much worse in her delivery.


And for the women who complain about men not putting the seats down:  do you really, really, sit on toilets without looking?  You know what business gets done there, and you're willing to plop your bare rump on a seat without first looking to see if you'd actually want to sit on it?  Regardless how clean my family is, there are just some things I'd rather not discover the hard way.

It's easier to read if you are sitting down.

I keep reading this headline as "Feminist glad ORC hunter is dead" and then I wonder why she would even care.

I've been quoted by no one saying that the penis is not, by any stretch of the imagination, Nature's Sniper Rifle.  I do have to respect someone who recognizes that limitation and is willing to close in for the point blank shot.

An end to the seat up or down debate:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_%28season_1%29#Toothbrush_Surprise

The episode involved them taping toothbrushes to the walls in the bathroom and then testing them a couple days (weeks) later. While it was only partly confirmed that fecal matter finds its way to other parts of your bathroom, via toilet spray when you flush with the seat up, do you really want to risk it?

I have a water closet.  The toilet is seperated from the sinks and the toothbrushes by a door.  Where is your god now?

Yeah, that was another reason I put the seat & cover down.  I totally forgot that is another reason I started the habit.  I saw/read an article that showed the distance toilet matter gets sprayed when you flush with the lid up.  Seat down before you flush please.  Those towels for drying your hands will be much nicer if you do.

My god is dead and I have killed him.

He wouldn't put the seat down.

The thing is, their 'control' toothbrushes had Fecal Coloform on them, too.  They hadden't been touched other than the initial placement (in a room down the hall, under a container) for the duration of the 4 weeks they ran the test.

Shit - it's everywhere.

And trying to avoid contagion not only leads to Howard Hughes levels of paranoia, it's also counterproductive to strengthening the immune system.  Think about all the nasty, filthy, pestulent crap your ancestors came into contact with on a daily basis; no indoor plumbing, no refrigeration, no real concept of bathing or personal hygiene.  Your very existence is proof that these people somehow still managed to pass on their genes, even while living in a fetid swamp of bacterium.

In light of this, don't you think it's a little silly to worry about closing the fucking toilet lid?

Don't ask me, I still eat food after it hits the floor.  Toilet seat up vs down? Pft.. so long as there isn't a puddle of piss anywhere, I'm happy.

Our ancestors also liked dying before their 30's.  Fortunately there is a nice wide medium between too clean and too dirty.

Not quite.  It was quite a bit like the ancient world, where the real period of danger was youth.  If you made it into adulthood it was fairly likely that barring accident you would make it into your sixties.

Which still fits what I said. :P

There is a record of a trial around Chaucer's time (he was the court recorder - which is probably why anyone knows about it) about who was allowed to use some specific piece of heraldry.  In the course of the trial many eye witnesses were called in to support one side or the others claims.  If the accounts are accurate several of the witnesses were in their late 90's and early 100's.

Basically, if you eat well and can manage to find a warm dry place to sleep in the winter the bacteria and such can go fuck themselves.

Keep in mind there were myriad reasons why the lifespan was so short. Disease was part of it sure, but so was violence, freezing to death, starving to death, etc.

I think George Carlin had it right in the standup where he talks about never being sick a day in his life then said he spent his childhood swimming in the Jersey river. ( I think that's the one.) He said he swam downstream from the sewers and it built up his immune system so to this day he basically tells germs to fuck themselves.

There is no "Jersey" river.  He could have been referring to the discharge ditch around Newark airport, as they have a combined sewer and once it rains the excess untreated flow is diverted thru the ditch to the bay.  :P

Also, the sewerage authority in Passaic discharges there effluent right into the river to be picked up shortly downstream by the water treatment plant.  Although the water being discharged is more than likely cleaner than the river water.

Y'all suck all the fun out of snarky comments.  Work with me here! :P

Hey, I'm from the Midwest. Hell, I don't know where you guys keep your rivers. I thought he said that, but he may have said his mother's bathtub for all I remember.

On another note, sort of on the original topic, PETA is glad Steve Irwin is dead too:



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14626178/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14626178/)

What I find interesting about the quote is that most people have said Stingrays aren't very dangerous and the PETA guy sounds like Irwin had cornered a lion or something.

He probably means Arthur Kill.

Nothing PETA says surprises me anymore, which is kind of sad since they provide great opportunities for humor.

late on the scene, but:

Why do you need to have the seat up when you piss? Can't you guys aim or anything?

Aiming is easy.

Leaning over so as the stream deteriorates and you don't dribble on the edge?  Not so much. 

Hell, in my office some guys can't even hit the urinal all the time. I'd hate to see their home baths.

I wouldn't say anything the day after the guy died -- she's attention whoring just like he did.  it's pretty unfair to have said that the day or so after the guy died, but then I don't live in AUS where his funeral today may or may not be a national day of mourning.  Not kidding.  Their PM and other officials are attending. That might set me off if I thought the guy was a dick.

which I do

I mean honestly: the guy made his living scarring the shit out of wild animals.  He fucking wrestled with them for christ sakes.  He may have "helped conservation" somewhere down the line but he essentially was a circus act.  Guy at work the other day: "Bozo the clown killed by elephant, film at eleven."  Exactly.  Sad the guy died, but I never thought what he did was cool.  Same kind of thing as throwing stuff  at animals in cages -- to piss them off.

Yes, that's how it is. There's also some kind of Murphy's Law where even if you combine perfect aim with a perfect lean as the stream deteriorates, there will still magically be urine on the seat. And even if there's no urine, when you flush there will be a splash of water that lands on the seat.

I should get an award or something then.

Maybe growing up with three sisters has just been a proper training ground for being able to master pissing into a toilet with the seat down, but I can't say I've had any troubles in the last 10 years of my life. And if I do happen to miss a little bit every now and then(alcohol!) I just get some toilet paper and wipe it up. Not really an epic task.

If I do put the seat up I generally put it down too, not really much effort and it does tend to look a little better that way.

Though, I'm just as surprised that any woman would be stupid enough to not check where the seat was before going to the toilet. Grow up in a convent or something? Surprise surprise but most guys sit down when they take a shit, and I've yet to hear them complaining about falling in.

Who would have thought people had trouble with such simple tasks?

(http://static.flickr.com/27/96960547_21c924dc6d_m.jpg)

Gratz!

Sweet!

Hehe...I'm sure the ladies in your life will be happy to know that when you actually DO pee on the seat, that a little swipe of TP is considered sufficient cleaning.


Wait - only most of the guys?

I stand atop the bowl, head near the ceiling, arms extended to embrace my domain, and sing an epic Viking poem as I shit standing up.  It's quite invigorating.

Do you give it a viking funeral after you're done, or just flush?

That's going to get costly in boats.

Fuck you too!

A friend of mine lived in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for three years, where crouch toilets are the norm. He used to frequent a western-style bar with western-style toilets and swears there were always footprints on top of the cistern.

Maybe they are mostly short and need to stand on something to reach their penises?   :|

Guy i used to work with is of Pakistani descent - 'parently in Pakistan crouch toilets are the norm too.  He got a Pakistan air flight once from Lahore to London - and there were footmarks on the toilet seat in the plane too.  Of course, there was also a little bit of turbulence on the flight - he said it was not at all pretty by the end of the flight...

This is some sort of urban legend or myth, isn't it?  The Footprints on the Toilet Seat... I swear I saw this on tv.

Not an urban legend, not a myth.  Korea has predominently crouch toilets also, and you'll still see footprints on some western toilets.

Of course, from everything I've read about this, crouching while shitting is truthfully the proper way to shit.  Evolution didn't take into account our high falutin' concept of sitting down while crapping.  It's actually slightly harder on the colon to do it that way, where as crouching is how it was meant to be done.  Of course, I'm willing to endure a little colonic discomfort in order to not have to hover my ass over a hole in the floor like some caveman.

You can both sit and have the proper colonic position if you get yourself a footstool. Probably something to bear in mind for old age. I suspect people with exceedingly long legs of having better colonic health. That and they can get parts in Tim Burton movies.

Color me utterly unsurprised that colonic health and Tim Burton movies came up at the same time.