Scot Dutchy wrote: You are purely misrepresenting me and I hope the mods take note.

What you think is your opinion. I hope the mods take note.

Scot Dutchy wrote:What do you think you are talking on this thread a load of crap. Just like another couple of members are.

As ever anyone who disagrees with Scot is talking crap. Wah wah fucking wah.
If you can't deal with people disagreeing with you Scot, you really should give discussion forums a miss.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Such judgemental twaddle.
What is the problem with judging your parenting style Scot? If you are so bothered about people expressing opinions on such things, don't fucking post them.

This is a discussion forum.
Not an "everyone must fucking agree with Scot always" forum.

Scot Dutchy wrote: You are not even a parent.

Irrelevant. But I know full well that you will come up with any number of fatuous reasons to weasel out of listening to what others have to say.

Sendraks wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:No? Does is say I called the membership is shite. That is your misinterpretation.

I stand by my interpretation of your comments. Next time make yourself clearer.

Scot Dutchy wrote: Admit it and stop weaselling out of it.

Hypocritical coming from you, the king of weaselling out of ever admitting he is wrong.

I cant help if cant cant read plain English but that is always your tactic not just against me but others as well.
A bit of misrepresentation does not hurt eh?

Sendraks wrote:If you can't deal with people disagreeing with you Scot, you really should give discussion forums a miss.

Disagreeing FFS

Scot Dutchy wrote:I cant help if cant cant read plain English but that is always your tactic not just against me but others as well.
A bit of misrepresentation does not hurt eh?

Misinterpretation = misrepresentation.

Write clearer English in future Scot.

At no point did I attempt to misrepresent you and none is evidenced in my posts.
You also failed, epically, to articulate how and why I was misrepresenting you. Thommo's post merely establishes how I might have misunderstood what you said.

So your repeated claim of misrepresentation is utterly hollow.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Disagreeing FFS

Scot, you have been in disagreement with myself, Fall and Doubt on this topic. Not only have you disagreed, you have resorted to insult and general evasion.

Sendraks wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Disagreeing FFS

Scot, you have been in disagreement with myself, Fall and Doubt on this topic. Not only have you disagreed, you have resorted to insult and general evasion.

What? FFS Fucking judgemental twaddle of the worst order. Messrs Prim and Proper who think they are the only ones who know how to bring up children. A bloody load of crap. Where is the insult?

Scot Dutchy wrote:What? FFS Fucking judgemental twaddle of the worst order.

It is disagreement scot. That you choose to dismiss their posts out of hand and result to calling them "judgemental twaddle" is typical of your MO. That's all you do. All you have ever done, when faced with anyone here disagreeing with you.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Messrs Prim and Proper who think they are the only ones who know how to bring up children.

They made no such claims and professed to no such position. They merely critiqued your approach. Which they were perfectly justified in doing, given that you posted it on a discussion forum.

Scot Dutchy wrote: A bloody load of crap. Where is the insult?

Calling them the "yummy mummy brigade" is the insult. Or do you deny that the comment below was directed at Fall, Doubt and myself?

Scot Dutchy wrote: I just love how the yummy mummy brigade just love to condemn anyone who thinks outside their box.

You've incorrectly assumed that anyone disagreeing with you advocates for a form of parenting that you describe as "yummy mummy." You have described those posters as being part of the "yummy mummy brigade."

Whereas you will note that your interlocutors have described your parenting methods as "Victorian" rather than yourself.

Is that an insult? The yummy mummies dont think so. We have a shop around the corner which is specially for the Yummy Mummies and I dont think they would take it as an insult. It is a sweet sugary term but not an insult.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Is that an insult?The yummy mummies dont think so. We have a shop around the corner which is specially for the Yummy Mummies and I dont think they would take it as an insult. It is a sweet sugary term but not an insult.

At no point until now have you made any comment that anyone here would consider you were using a "sweet sugary term."

Let us consider this little gem from you.

Scot Dutchy wrote:I am not into kids like the stupid yummie mummies are

You consider "yummy mummies" to be stupid.
So it is reasonable and logical to conclude that anyone you address here as "the yummy mummy brigade" you consider to be stupid. Which therefore makes the use of "the yummy mummy brigade" to describe other posters here, insulting.

And let me repeat for the umpteenth time.

Neither Fall, nor Doubt nor myself, have at any point advocated for the "yummy mummy" method of child rearing.

Zadocfish2 wrote:

Hey, if you don't like life, there's the door. Don't let it hit you in the ass on the way out

Okay, that might be a little bit too far. Like, maybe more than a little bit.

Generally, I'd agree. But A4H pretty much just drags it out of you. If I ever hate life as much as A4H pretends to, you can bet your ass I'll take my own advice.

Sendraks wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Is that an insult?The yummy mummies dont think so. We have a shop around the corner which is specially for the Yummy Mummies and I dont think they would take it as an insult. It is a sweet sugary term but not an insult.

At no point until now have you made any comment that anyone here would consider you were using a "sweet sugary term."

Let us consider this little gem from you.

Scot Dutchy wrote:I am not into kids like the stupid yummie mummies are

You consider "yummy mummies" to be stupid.
So it is reasonable and logical to conclude that anyone you address here as "the yummy mummy brigade" you consider to be stupid. Which therefore makes the use of "the yummy mummy brigade" to describe other posters here, insulting.

And let me repeat for the umpteenth time.

Neither Fall, nor Doubt nor myself, have at any point advocated for the "yummy mummy" method of child rearing.

Could not care what they are advocating but to call what I have done as disgusting is very provocative and very judgemental.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Could not care what they are advocating

You apparently cared enough to present arguments that implied they were advocating for a position and you cared enough to level an insult at your interlocutors in the process.

Scot Dutchy wrote: but to call what I have done as disgusting is very provocative and very judgemental.

Judgemental yes - but then this is a discussion forum and people are allowed to post their opinions of what others post. You posted about your parenting style and some of us did not look favourably on your approach. This is perfectly acceptable for a discussion forum.

As to why those judgements should be "disgusting" I don't see why. I can understand that you might be disgusted at people disagreeing with you, but that does not make their disagreements disgusting in and of themselves.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Thommo wrote:

Sendraks wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:
The obvious fact of misrepresentation?

It is clearly not a misrepresentation. To recap, for those with poor memories. You said.

Scot Dutchy wrote:It really is a load of shite but that is the membership for you.

This is calling the membership of these forums shite. That is what YOU said.

To be fair, it doesn't. I think it heavily implies it, and I think Scot is talking a lot of shite, but that quote does not actually call the membership shite.

The prounoun "it" and the pronoun "that" do not directly have to refer to the object "the membership" appearing later in the sentence "It really is a load of shite but that is the membership for you." to make sense.

For example, suppose you spent 4 hours queuing at the passport office, then when you got to the front of the line they closed up for the day, slamming the grille in your face and wasting your time. On relating this story to your friend they respond "It really is a load of shite but that is the passport office for you.", the natural sense to read the pronouns "it" and "that" is in reference to the events that happened, possibly as an exemplar of what the passport office usually does.

Yep just plain misrepresentation. People should learn to read properly. I was referring the crap that certain members had written not the membership.

And if you want things to less ambiguous, perhaps you could be clearer. I first read it as you calling the membership shite.
Perhaps you could have written, "It really is a load of shite but that is the quality of posts I have of late begin to expect of certain members here", or something like that.
But, if we give you the benefit of the doubt, if you weren't calling the entire membership shite, you must have been referring to everything everyone posts as shite. Bit troll like wouldn't you say?

monkeyboy wrote:And if you want things to less ambiguous, perhaps you could be clearer. I first read it as you calling the membership shite.

What was ambiguous? It is normal English. The fact that people read into things what is not there just shows the approach they taking.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Sendraks wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Yep just plain misrepresentation. People should learn to read properly. I was referring the crap that certain members had written not the membership.

Perhaps write with sufficient clarity in the future, that your meaning can easily be divined. Or failing that, where you disagree with member's interpretations of your comments, take the time to explain yourself clearly without throwing a tantrum.

Thommo won't always be around to explain your posts to others and it is deeply sad in this case that you appear to be reliant on him doing so on your behalf.

You'll also note that he expressed the view that, regardless, he thinks you are talking shite.
Which you are.

What he thinks is his opinion. You are purely misrepresenting me and I hope the mods take note.
What do you think you are talking on this thread a load of crap. Just like another couple of members are.
Such judgemental twaddle. You are not even a parent.

I am. Now provide evidence for your claims about yummy mummies in this thread.

Scot Dutchy wrote:
What was ambiguous? It is normal English.

Well I suppose if badly worded English does pass for "normal" in various parts of England.

Scot Dutchy wrote: The fact that people read into things what is not there just shows the approach they taking.

It shows that you failed to be clear and our interpretation of your comment (or misinterpretation) was a result of that. Nothing more.

If you'd actually taken the time to explain why you considered you were being misinterpreted, some of this discussion could have been avoided.

Sendraks wrote:Ah, so what Scot is saying is that the discussion itself is shite and that such things are to be expected from the membership.

Which isn't directly calling the membership shite, but only that such shite is to be expected of the membership.

That really isn't much of a vast improvement and nor do I see anyone being unjustified in holding the view that Scot basically called the membership "shite." And to claim he has said that, really doesn't pass muster as a misrepresentation.

Pretty much.

I suspect it falls on the right side of the forum rules though.

Thommo wrote:Pretty much.

I suspect it falls on the right side of the forum rules though.

I'm pretty sure you are right.

Sendraks wrote:As to why those judgements should be "disgusting" I don't see why. I can understand that you might be disgusted at people disagreeing with you, but that does not make their disagreements disgusting in and of themselves.

I'm retracting this statement, as it was incorrect and a misunderstanding of what Scot said. My apologies to Scot.

laklak wrote:What's a yummy mummy? Is it anything like a MILF?

Same thing.

Here's tips (with pictures!) if you want to further sate your curiosity.

http://grenglish.co.uk/yummy-mummy-the-how-to-guide/

I have to say, that is a good looking leather jacket.