Fucking holidays

1235»

Comments

  • Ricardus wrote: »
    I bet you use INDEX(MATCH()) instead of VLOOKUP(), you filthy pervert.

    I use INDEX(MATCH()), and I’m proud of it. We need an International IndexMatchers Day to shake off negative perceptions such as yours.
  • Is anyone else as confused as I am? Who is arguing for what here?
  • Ricardus wrote: »
    I bet you use INDEX(MATCH()) instead of VLOOKUP(), you filthy pervert.

    I use INDEX(MATCH()), and I’m proud of it. We need an International IndexMatchers Day to shake off negative perceptions such as yours.

    I don't understand why people like you have to optimise it up all over the place. Can't you at least keep that sort of thing in hidden columns?
  • Is anyone else as confused as I am? Who is arguing for what here?

    Who cares what anyone is arguing? Much better to speculate on the minutiae of their inner lives and subconscious motivations. You get much more dirt that way, and no-one can prove you wrong.
  • To recap the shitshow so far: @Blahblah expressed his disgust for a male acquaintance going on holiday to Thailand, for the explicit purpose of fucking as many prostitutes as possible while there.

    People have variously interpreted that as @Blahblah (a) not being sex positive (b) not supporting the rights of sex workers (c) not being concerned about the feelings of beta males (d) displaying their religiously-inspired prudery or (e) being concerned about the structural abuse of the disparity in economic power to purchase sex, with a side order of lack of consent.

    Personally, I would have gone with (e), but you know, people.
  • CruntCrunt Shipmate
    Blahblah wrote: »

    Says the guy who can't imagine the lives of people in Thailand who give 50p blowjobs to foreigners.
    This is about the third (or fourth?) time you've mentioned 50p blowjobs.

    That's about twenty baht. I've been to Thailand a lot (I live nearby); multiple trips to Bangkok, Chiang Mai a couple of times, Phuket for a holiday and a longer stay with friends in Phetchaburi. Admittedly, I haven't engaged in any commercial sex (and, despite my relaxed sexual morals, very little recreational sex either) while I have been there, but I cannot imagine any prostitute offering a 50p blowjob, especially not one who is being run by criminal gang. Yet you bang on about 50p blowjobs as if they are a thing.

    Do you have any evidence for this, or is it just a number you have pulled put of nowhere?

    Foreigners in Thailand ALWAYS pay more than locals (always!). It doesn't matter how well you speak Thai, or how long you've lived there, you will always have to pay a premium for anything; admittedly, premium price in Thailand translates to a reasonable price by western standards.

    A twenty baht blowjob might be a thing for a salt worker in Samut Sakhon or a delivery guy in Sukhumvit, but I can't imagine a foreigner being offered such a cheap deal. Ever.

  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    To recap
    Oh, second-newest Hellhost, your recap gambit would be more pitchfork-y if you managed to land a tine the actual conversations that forked off instead of pretending that @garglegargle's originally conjured whateverthefuckthatwas was central.

    The biggest hint was RuthW pretending to experience fear.
  • Is anyone else as confused as I am? Who is arguing for what here?

    lilBuddha and BlahBlah are doing their level best to hurl insults but not actually address what the other is saying. RooK is trying hard to twit BlahBlah, with some limited success. Other than that, I have no idea.
  • I'd get the popcorn out, but with the spittle and other bodily fluids flying around, well...
  • I'd get the popcorn out, but with the spittle and other bodily fluids flying around, well...

    And bodily solids.
  • Crunt wrote: »
    Foreigners in Thailand ALWAYS pay more than locals (always!).
    But I was promised "special price"!!

    (I have a great address for a tailor now though).
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    To recap the shitshow so far: @Blahblah expressed his disgust for a male acquaintance going on holiday to Thailand, for the explicit purpose of fucking as many prostitutes as possible while there.

    People have variously interpreted that as @Blahblah (a) not being sex positive (b) not supporting the rights of sex workers (c) not being concerned about the feelings of beta males (d) displaying their religiously-inspired prudery or (e) being concerned about the structural abuse of the disparity in economic power to purchase sex, with a side order of lack of consent.

    Personally, I would have gone with (e), but you know, people.

    (e) makes sense to me as well. What's all the fuss about?
  • Spreadsheets and Rule 34. Don't know if @RooK has registered kinkyexcel.com yet (currently US$10 per year).
  • Meanwhile, poster who says they like kittens lambasted for not liking dogs, hating wild birds, told they're a tool of the pet-industrial complex, and medicalised as toxoplasmosis-positive.

    Or we can just argue about the cost of a blow job. Whatever works for you people. And when I say 'people', I use the term advisedly.
  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Without rehashing the whole thread from this past summer, the problem, it seems to me, is that the context undercuts a claim that the spoiler tag was there out of regard for those who might be triggered. The spoiler tag came at the end of a paragraph basically pooh-poohing those who find offense in things you don’t think should be seen as offensive, and at the end of a sentence about those who clutch their pearls at the word you then hid behind a spoiler tag. So at the same time you say you’re trying to show regard for those who may be triggered, you also seem to be saying they’re silly for having any problem with the word.

    I’m not saying that was your intent. I’m saying that’s how it came across, at least to me.
    As it did to me.

    I'll cop that.

    I was intending to contrast the response to the less important wrongs I detailed in that paragraph with the response to the very substantial wrong of sex tourism in Thailand. The irritation I felt towards the responses to the OP combined with the irritation I feel about the issue of using female body parts to swear, and I over-egged the pudding. I didn't initially intend to disparage people who held different views to me, but I ended up doing that because of my irritation.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    .. (e) being concerned about the structural abuse of the disparity in economic power to purchase sex, with a side order of lack of consent.

    Personally, I would have gone with (e)...

    Lack of consent, if true, would indeed be something to be concerned about.

    Prostitution is where someone with more "pulling power" than "economic power" and someone with more wealth than attractiveness make an exchange. (Usually his wealth for her sexual favours, but not necessarily).

    "Exploitation" is a poorly-defined term but usually means that the speaker considers the price of something is too high or too low.

    I suspect that blahblah's main point is that 50p is too cheap, so yes it's e). But he's not being very clear about what his main point is.
  • @Russ - you've never actually met a prostitute, let alone bought their services before, have you?
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Is anyone else as confused as I am? Who is arguing for what here?

    lilBuddha and BlahBlah are doing their level best to hurl insults but not actually address what the other is saying. RooK is trying hard to twit BlahBlah, with some limited success. Other than that, I have no idea.
    This is goldfish analysis and not one that represents the entire thread. But whatevs, bro.

  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    Is anyone else as confused as I am? Who is arguing for what here?

    lilBuddha and BlahBlah are doing their level best to hurl insults but not actually address what the other is saying. RooK is trying hard to twit BlahBlah, with some limited success. Other than that, I have no idea.
    This is goldfish analysis and not one that represents the entire thread. But whatevs, bro.

    This is dodging but whatevs sis.
  • Dodging what? This mis-characterisation of an entire thread?
  • Till dodging. Will you EVER learn to accept responsibility for your actions? Most of us learned that in Kindergarten.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Till dodging. Will you EVER learn to accept responsibility for your actions? Most of us learned that in Kindergarten.
    Fuck you. What actions? That, after 5 pages I lost patience with that idiot? You are such a tool, sometimes mt. You over react constantly. You accuse without considering context and you get to be the behaviour police? right. I've put up with a lot of your shit because you are not a bad person despite being an argumentative, reactionary fighty little shit sometimes. I'm no longer sure you are worth the consideration.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    /\
    Projection
  • "I've put up with a lot of your shit because you are not a bad person despite being an argumentative, reactionary fighty little shit sometimes"

    Question: which Shipmate most resembles this description?
  • "I've put up with a lot of your shit because you are not a bad person despite being an argumentative, reactionary fighty little shit sometimes"

    Question: which Shipmate most resembles this description?
    I've been on the Ship for 10 or so years. In that time I've noticed very few people who do not ever let their personality get in the way at least sometimes. Myself quite a lot, admittedly. I haven't read my Hell thread for quite awhile, but I do see names pop up in association with it. And some of them are people I quite like. I still do, regardless of their participation there, because I get it.
    It is not that I do not recognise those qualities in myself, but I do not chastise mt for being like that at every opportunity. I do not use it to ignore points he makes instead of addressing them. And that is what I was addressing.
  • Human beings suck.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    I looked at the classic ship posts thread in heaven recently, and was not at all surprised to see how many of LB's pearls are posted there by MT. We are all here, doing what we do, because we fucking love it, the whole box and dice.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I looked at the classic ship posts thread in heaven recently, and was not at all surprised to see how many of LB's pearls are posted there by MT. We are all here, doing what we do, because we fucking love it, the whole box and dice.

    The what now?
  • sorry, Ship's Quote Thread in The Circus. I was there to acknowledge an embarrassing error in Timeless Tests.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    My problem with your dipshit OP is not that I think the bloke in it wasn't being exploitative but that your outrage seemed to be more about being told about it.
    It takes a certain sort of mindset to read a post in which someone says they find a situation morally dodgy, and on the grounds that the OP doesn't explicitly state that the aspect that they find morally dodgy is the obviously morally dodgy aspect, they must in fact care only about some other less morally dodgy aspect.
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    My problem with your dipshit OP is not that I think the bloke in it wasn't being exploitative but that your outrage seemed to be more about being told about it.
    It takes a certain sort of mindset to read a post in which someone says they find a situation morally dodgy, and on the grounds that the OP doesn't explicitly state that the aspect that they find morally dodgy is the obviously morally dodgy aspect, they must in fact care only about some other less morally dodgy aspect.

    Well, I found the OP all over the place. Eventually, I got what it was about, although hang on, did I? It's certainly had multiple interpretations.
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    My problem with your dipshit OP is not that I think the bloke in it wasn't being exploitative but that your outrage seemed to be more about being told about it.
    It takes a certain sort of mindset to read a post in which someone says they find a situation morally dodgy, and on the grounds that the OP doesn't explicitly state that the aspect that they find morally dodgy is the obviously morally dodgy aspect, they must in fact care only about some other less morally dodgy aspect.
    And it takes a certain sort of mindset to ignore that the OP has repeatedly refused to clarify despite being asked by multiple people multiple times.
    Life is not zero-sum. One can think the exploitation being discussed is wrong and still not like the other things that accompany the condemnation.
  • One thing that threw me, was that the OP says the worst thing wasn't the thing itself, (screwing Thai prostitutes), but talking about it after talking about one's elderly mother. I couldn't process that, hyperbole I guess. Nobody would seriously mean that, would they?
  • BlahblahBlahblah Suspended
    edited November 2019
    One thing that threw me, was that the OP says the worst thing wasn't the thing itself, (screwing Thai prostitutes), but talking about it after talking about one's elderly mother. I couldn't process that, hyperbole I guess. Nobody would seriously mean that, would they?

    You seem to be someone with limited emotional intelligence so let me try to explain this to you with another example.

    My friend makes me cry. She works in a bad job and struggles to make ends meet as a single mum in a one room flat. She told me today that she has no central heating or running hot water, no furniture other than a fold-up bed and two chairs and a table. She was telling me that she was so glad she had found on Freecycle someone who was giving away a washing machine as she could save money and time going to the launderette.

    But the worst thing was when she turned around and asked for suggestions as to how she could save money.

    ---

    Maybe this is too tough for you to understand, but I guess I need to spell it out for you: of course my knowing more about her situation is not worse than the actual situation. Of course the fucked up situation that my poor friend finds herself in is a product of a fucked up economic environment that means a single mum has to survive in an unheated flat whilst bankers tell her she can't afford a mortgage to get anywhere else.

    But, you see, I was blissfully unaware of the situation until she told me. Anger and tears are not generally things provoked by abstract ideas that you might be tangentially related to but when overwhelmed by an overload of information that you were unprepared for about a situation that is truly fucked up on so many levels.

  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    My problem with your dipshit OP is not that I think the bloke in it wasn't being exploitative but that your outrage seemed to be more about being told about it.
    It takes a certain sort of mindset to read a post in which someone says they find a situation morally dodgy, and on the grounds that the OP doesn't explicitly state that the aspect that they find morally dodgy is the obviously morally dodgy aspect, they must in fact care only about some other less morally dodgy aspect.
    And it takes a certain sort of mindset to ignore that the OP has repeatedly refused to clarify despite being asked by multiple people multiple times.
    Life is not zero-sum. One can think the exploitation being discussed is wrong and still not like the other things that accompany the condemnation.

    And there once again you show that you are unable to actually listen. Several other people seem to have been entirely able to ask sensible questions which I tried to answer to clarify my response.

    It's only you who seems to think that this is not good enough because the explanations don't fit within your preconceived ideas about how this is all about an inability to deal with people having sex.
  • Blahblah wrote: »
    One thing that threw me, was that the OP says the worst thing wasn't the thing itself, (screwing Thai prostitutes), but talking about it after talking about one's elderly mother. I couldn't process that, hyperbole I guess. Nobody would seriously mean that, would they?

    You seem to be someone with limited emotional intelligence so let me try to explain this to you with another example.

    My friend makes me cry. She works in a bad job and struggles to make ends meet as a single mum in a one room flat. She told me today that she has no central heating or running hot water, no furniture other than a fold-up bed and two chairs and a table. She was telling me that she was so glad she had found on Freecycle someone who was giving away a washing machine as she could save money and time going to the launderette.

    But the worst thing was when she turned around and asked for suggestions as to how she could save money.

    ---

    Maybe this is too tough for you to understand, but I guess I need to spell it out for you: of course my knowing more about her situation is not worse than the actual situation. Of course the fucked up situation that my poor friend finds herself in is a product of a fucked up economic environment that means a single mum has to survive in an unheated flat whilst bankers tell her she can't afford a mortgage to get anywhere else.

    But, you see, I was blissfully unaware of the situation until she told me. Anger and tears are not generally things provoked by abstract ideas that you might be tangentially related to but when overwhelmed by an overload of information that you were unprepared for about a situation that is truly fucked up on so many levels.

    Well, of course, you are right about my limited emotional intelligence. Only the other day, a traffic warden commented on it, as he was affixing a fine to my car, me sobbing in the gutter. However, both your examples have taken the scales from my eyes, I feel like a new-born lamb, and ready for whatever emotional conundrums life might heave towards me. So thanx again.
  • BlahblahBlahblah Suspended
    edited November 2019
    Blahblah wrote: »
    One thing that threw me, was that the OP says the worst thing wasn't the thing itself, (screwing Thai prostitutes), but talking about it after talking about one's elderly mother. I couldn't process that, hyperbole I guess. Nobody would seriously mean that, would they?

    You seem to be someone with limited emotional intelligence so let me try to explain this to you with another example.

    My friend makes me cry. She works in a bad job and struggles to make ends meet as a single mum in a one room flat. She told me today that she has no central heating or running hot water, no furniture other than a fold-up bed and two chairs and a table. She was telling me that she was so glad she had found on Freecycle someone who was giving away a washing machine as she could save money and time going to the launderette.

    But the worst thing was when she turned around and asked for suggestions as to how she could save money.

    ---

    Maybe this is too tough for you to understand, but I guess I need to spell it out for you: of course my knowing more about her situation is not worse than the actual situation. Of course the fucked up situation that my poor friend finds herself in is a product of a fucked up economic environment that means a single mum has to survive in an unheated flat whilst bankers tell her she can't afford a mortgage to get anywhere else.

    But, you see, I was blissfully unaware of the situation until she told me. Anger and tears are not generally things provoked by abstract ideas that you might be tangentially related to but when overwhelmed by an overload of information that you were unprepared for about a situation that is truly fucked up on so many levels.

    Well, of course, you are right about my limited emotional intelligence. Only the other day, a traffic warden commented on it, as he was affixing a fine to my car, me sobbing in the gutter. However, both your examples have taken the scales from my eyes, I feel like a new-born lamb, and ready for whatever emotional conundrums life might heave towards me. So thanx again.

    Oh wait I get you now: you are a prick getting some kind of kick from trolling and scoring points on the internet.
  • Ah but saying that someone is of limited emotional intelligence is not trolling. I get it.
  • It's accurate: you literally don't understand how other people experience emotions.

    Either that or that you do but are just saying things now to score points.
  • Can we get back to the Excel function jokes yet?
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    I've always like how dirty HLOOKUP() sounds.
  • Blahblah wrote: »
    It's accurate: you literally don't understand how other people experience emotions.

    Either that or that you do but are just saying things now to score points.

    But it's hurtful.
  • Ok booger.
  • Sounds a bit premature to me.
  • I'm going to do my impression of Neil in The Young Ones soon.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I'm going to do my impression of Neil in The Young Ones soon.

    I couldn't find a relevant "guys guys"quote in the youtube, but I did find this one, which seems astoundingly funny to me. I thought about posting Neil's Last Supper, oh hell I will. Sorry hosts. No no. I won't. I'm being nostalgic.

This discussion has been closed.