Saturday, 5 September 2015

Middle class professional women in responsible jobs cannot tell difference between a hypothesis and an accusation


"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

Sarah Bailey:

"Slut is now considered a derogatory term for someone. It's like name calling in the playground. And now people realise that the number of sexual partners one has had has no bearing on who they are as a person."

"The number of sexual partners one has had has no bearing on who they are as a person."
  • Claire Khaw
LikeComment   Storify
  • Seen by 12
  • Claire Khaw Sarah Bailey said this. What sort of a person would her husband think she is if she had a number of sexual partners as well as her husband? 

    What would you think of her is she is known to enjoy a spot of bestiality/necrophilia/dogging/paedophilia?
    4 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw A plainly ridiculous statement, but you will all no doubt defend her unthinkingly.
    3 hrs · Like
  • Robert Todd I don't ask people how many sexual partners they have. So it's pretty irrelevant to how I think of them.
    For instance, I have no idea how many sexual partners you have had, Claire, and it wouldn't change my opinion of you being batshit crazy, if you were a virgin or the local bike.
    3 hrs · Like · 4
  • Anne Reed Dennis You really should get professional help, Claire.
    3 hrs · Like · 2
  • Claire Khaw Aren't you tired yet of saying the same thing again and again, Anne?
    3 hrs · Like
  • Anne Reed Dennis Aren't you?
    3 hrs · Like · 1
  • Claire Khaw No. I might stop saying it and move on to something else once enough people have shown that they have grasped my point.
    3 hrs · Like
  • Anne Reed Dennis You have no point ... on any level.
    3 hrs · Like · 2
  • Sarah Bailey I think he'd be pretty disgusted if I had extra sexual partners after marrying him. But before marrying him? He knows exactly how many people I've had sexual relations with, and I him. It made no difference to either of us, altho' I doubt I would have proceeded with our relationship had he been a virgin. 
    Now, what other person information would you like to glean from myself and other members of this group, you voyeur.
    2 hrs · Like · 1
  • Sarah Bailey Yes, it's a plainly ridiculous statement Claire. But unfortunately, you won't actually understand why.
    2 hrs · Like · 1
  • Claire Khaw You can't explain it properly, can you? 

    Would you like to have a relationship with a man who is clearly a womaniser?
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw It is asinine to pretend that if you are single and looking the kind of sexual partner and sex your potential partner is looking for MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE TO YOU. 

    If you are looking for a husband you would not want a gay man or a lesbian.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw You can't even think logically and blindly defend each other even when you know someone has made really stupid comments.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw I have told you how gender relations affects the politics of a society. That is why you are all objecting to my proposal that a matriarchy become a patriarchy.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw I know how it works, so it is asinine to say that the kind of sex your potential partner has had or is looking for or will have does not make a difference.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw Would the man who is now your husband have married you if he knew you liked having sex with under-aged boys, Sarah?
    2 hrs · Like
  • Robert Todd Claire, I've had loads of sexual partners because I'm really good at sexytime. Does it have a bearing on the person I am?
    2 hrs · Like · 1
  • Claire Khaw I was only quoting your words, Sarah.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw Sore loser.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Gillian Carpenter There's no rule against page members blocking other page members Sarah, the only rule is about admin. So feel free.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw You can't even admit that you mis-spoke.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw You can't even admit that you made an error of logic, or that you didn't think things through when you said it.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Robert Todd Ffs! Claire. I can see why you're single.
    2 hrs · Like · 1
  • Gillian Carpenter And Claire, I'm removing the comment making unfounded claims about Sarah, and you are on the naughty step for another 24 hours. It was a disgusting thing to say.
    2 hrs · Like · 2
  • Claire Khaw When you said it makes no difference how many sex partners or the kind of sex a person has had.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw Obviously.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Gillian Carpenter Apologies to Sarah. I didn't see the comment.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Claire Khaw What comment?
    2 hrs · Like
  • Gillian Carpenter The comment I screenshot then deleted. Goodbye for a bitClaire Khaw.

Claire Khaw
04/09/2015 21:12
Which comment are you complaining about?

04/09/2015 21:14
Gillian Carpenter
Don't even speak to me Claire. I'm incandescent with rage. How dare you accuse anyone of having a sexual interest in underage boys? What gives you the fucking right? So for right now - fuck off.

04/09/2015 21:14
Claire Khaw
I didn't say she had.
I was giving a HYPOTHETICAL example.

04/09/2015 21:14
Gillian Carpenter
Yes you did. Now fuck off.

04/09/2015 21:14
Claire Khaw
You don't even know what a hypothetical situation is.

  • Jeffrey Marshall "Would the man who is now your husband have married you if he knew you liked having sex with under-aged boys, Sarah?"

    It certainly sounds like a hypothesis. 

    However, it could be a hypothesis grounded in what one knows - or thinks one knows - about Sarah's sexual preferences. Would your husband have married you if he knew what we both know, which is that you have a preference for under-aged boys?

    I am surprised they formed that conclusion though.
    1 hr · Like
  • Claire Khaw There are 2 hypothetical situations here:

    1. If her husband believed she had a weakness for under-aged adolescents

    2. if this belief is true
    1 hr · Edited · Like
  • Claire Khaw Even if it were not true it would affect her husband's feelings towards her if he believed it to be true.
    1 hr · Like
  • Jeffrey Marshall More to the point Sarah's friends thought it might be true. You may have touched a nerve without meaning to.
    1 hr · Like
  • Claire Khaw Would she be a different person though? 

    Well, we wouldn't want our spouses to have sex with other people, but what about friends we don't have sex with? 

    Is it any of our business?

    Is it only our business if what they get up to becomes public knowledge and embarrasses us?
    1 hr · Like
  • Claire Khaw Otherwise they can be the biggest porn star and the biggest sex serial killer?
    1 hr · Like
  • Claire Khaw Would we be saying the same thing about our children?
    1 hr · Like
  • Claire Khaw I think it would OBVIOUSLY affect a person lifestyle and personality the kind of sex they have and like and the number of sex partners they have had. 

    After all, women of child-bearing age used to be asked by anxious employers if they had a boyfriend
    /husband are thinking of sprogging/completed their families not because they are thinking of having sex with the woman in question but whether they are going to have to pay maternity leave and how often.
    1 hr · Edited · Like
  • Claire Khaw When we are sharing a flat the sex of our flatmate is all important even if we are not thinking of having sex with them or paying them maternity leave.


Anonymous said...

JM said...

Which group is this?

Claire Khaw said...

AH said...

They are a bunch of washed up 'has beens or never has beens' and I don't know why you bother with them.

Carpenter keeps putting you 'on the naughty step' FFS?!?!

The only reason she doesn't ban you permanently is because you keep them alive. Without you that group would be like the communal lounge of a geriatrics home.

How can you stand being around a bunch of losers for so long??
Ditch the crazy bitch and her gang of flying monkeys for goodness sake.

Claire Khaw said...

But women like that are in charge.

The views of the media are their views. They are the mainstream and the establishment.

They even deal with sex offenders.

Their smugness and sense of entitlement is just as breath-taking as their narrow-mindedness and their ignorance.

AH said...

I went to school with women like that and then spent a couple of decades working with them.

For starters they will still call their parents mummy and daddy.

They'll have gone through a rebellious phase, drugs, alcohol etc and been into scenes such as punk, mods, new romantics. They'll have been 'anti establishment' for a while and joined 'causes' that were fashionable like Menwith Hill, poll tax protests, BNP, Tree huggers and they'll be filling boxes for Calais and chaining themselves to railings in support of Syrian refugees.

Their parents had little or no time for them and hardly noticed they were there until they fucked up and caused embarrassment. Then Daddy would step in with his cheque book and the path to the straight and narrow begins.

Their pasts are erased unless they wish to flaunt it to bottom feeders that they feel need to know that they are 'one of them' deep down.

They love to think that they are elitist and superior but deep down they are desperately unhappy. Many are incapable of maintaining longterm relationships unless that relationship provides them with something other than love or friendship.

They enter professions that they are not equipped for or able to cope with on the back of the family name and money which ultimately will but them back where they started with alcohol or drug dependency.

Claire Khaw said...

These women are IN CHARGE OF PEOPLE'S LIVES. They deal with sex offenders and sexually abused children. It is chilling.

JF said...

Of course there is a huge difference between a woman who has slept with five men, compared to women who have slept with fifty five men.

A sane man does not want a slag for a wife.

Slags can't understand this.

Claire Khaw said...

Thank you for all our comments. Can I have some about the usefulness of propounding theories and hypotheses?

BP said...

In future, put hypothetical in brackets, Claire. If nothing else it'll save some righteous indignation.

Claire Khaw said...

I think people who go around thinking they are educated professional graduates should be named and shamed if they do not know what a hypothesis is. It is a devastating tool of debate, as I have ably demonstrated. These harridans are furious with me because I easily won the argument so they want to pretend I accused one of their number of being some sort of sex offender when all I did was say "Would the feelings of your nearest and dearest change towards you if they knew you had X cubed partners rather than X partners?" Of course they would. Instead of admitting that I was right after all, they removed me from their cosy little circle.

On the question of sex partners one could in theory have no sex partners at all to having slept with thousands of people.

Claire Khaw said...

I am sorry to keep going on about this, but I don't think people really understand the point I am making.

What Sarah Bailey said was patently wrong ie that it has no effect on our personalities or character the number of sex partners we have had.

I proved this by posing a HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION about how her husband would feel if her sex partners included under-aged adolescent boys. That was what got me kicked out of the group because that point hit home and they really had no answer to this.

Not only her husband would mind but her friends and family would too.

They then pretended I had in fact accused her of having a penchant for under-aged adolescent boys when of course I had done nothing of the sort.

I correctly predicted that in the poll the rest of the group would agree with her and agree about the statement she made about the number of sex partners one has had being irrelevant to our personality or character.

So now they are pretending that they don't know the difference between a hypothetical question and an accusation.

If they had enough power they would actually conflate the two to protect their own feelings.

The usefulness of the hypothesis is in solving problems cannot be denied but these women would BAN ITS USE if it challenges any of their views.

I am saying these women represent mainstream opinion in the media and they are stupid, unprincipled, easily offended and do not respect either truth or logic.

I am saying if you allow these women to carry on representing mainstream opinion your civilisation will decline and its intellectual heritage will be sacrificed to protect mediocre and over-promoted women from offence.