ForumGarden

I have found some FG Member to be married and some single, some estranged, and some just strange.

I observe that most of the women are females and some of the men are males, and a couple I'm not sure about.

Some members rent, some are buying, some own a home and others live with a family member. One or two might be in the joint.

The majority are probably right handed and use utensils when eating (if others are watching).

The majjority will drink a beverage from some kind of container cup or glass.

Not all agree that the Missionary Position is that great.

Some FG Members own dogs, some cats, some birds, and some are animals themselves.

Large number of FG Members eat Junk Food and like it, and the majority don't really eat a healthy breakfast.

Many are very sensitive to what they think is critisism.

Large number of FG Members are on some kind of meds, some should be.



More to come

Lon;633176 wrote: I have found some FG Member to be married and some single, some estranged, and some just strange.



I observe that most of the women are females and some of the men are males, and a couple I'm not sure about.



Some members rent, some are buying, some own a home and others live with a family member. One or two might be in the joint.



The majority are probably right handed and use utensils when eating (if others are watching).



The majjority will drink a beverage from some kind of container cup or glass.



Not all agree that the Missionary Position is that great.



Some FG Member own dogs, some cats, some birds, and some are animals themselves.



Large number of FG Members eat Junk Food and like it, and the majority don't really eat a healthy breakfast.



Many are very sensitive to what they think is criticism.



Large number of FG Members are on some kind of meds, some should be.





More to come


Hum, Still no Chinese criticizing.

We are what we are. I'm happy being me thanks

ummmmmmmm cant wait for the more to come

Lon, you forgot bored.

I dont think we stereotype enough. We should have a special stereotyping section. A place we can pigeonhole other members. A place we can feel safe and free to stuff eachother into tidy little labeled boxes.

A place where we all can cast members into a mold.

A place where we can conform others to our liking as we see fit.

A place with classes and categories.

A place where we can grade eachother.

A place where your grouping determines your worth.

A place with tiers and subcategories.

A place free of persecution.

A place to harass and afflict.

Yes friends this is my dream.

One day.









One day !

Nomad;633209 wrote: I dont think we stereotype enough. We should have a special stereotyping section. A place we can pigeonhole other members. A place we can feel safe and free to stuff eachother into tidy little labeled boxes.

A place where we all can cast members into a mold.

A place where we can conform others to our liking as we see fit.

A place with classes and categories.

A place where we can grade eachother.

A place where your grouping determines your worth.

A place with tiers and subcategories.

A place free of persecution.

A place to harass and afflict.

Yes friends this is my dream.

One day.









One day !


It's called Topeka.

No offense to anyone living in or near to Topeka, I just like the way it sounds.

People can be anybody they want on the net so what you see is not always what you get,Anyway how boring it would be if we were all the same.One thing I know is you can not stereotype anyone by their race religion sexual preference etc.The one thing about humans is we are all unique. Sorry if that sounds heavy.

Lon;633176 wrote: I have found some FG Member to be married and some single, some estranged, and some just strange.

I observe that most of the women are females and some of the men are males, and a couple I'm not sure about.

Some members rent, some are buying, some own a home and others live with a family member. One or two might be in the joint.

The majority are probably right handed and use utensils when eating (if others are watching).

The majjority will drink a beverage from some kind of container cup or glass.

Not all agree that the Missionary Position is that great.

Some FG Members own dogs, some cats, some birds, and some are animals themselves.

Large number of FG Members eat Junk Food and like it, and the majority don't really eat a healthy breakfast.

Many are very sensitive to what they think is critisism.

Large number of FG Members are on some kind of meds, some should be.



More to come


Ha ha I love it, where you find that one? :wah:

I don't want a mold but I could go for a drink :wah:

I feel like something ought to be merged around here.

I also feel like any kind of character assessment is now being called stereotyping. How, if one desires, is one to describe anyone around here?

Extension on that last thought to give an example. I said there was a character who was an intellectual. Then there was a character who was a sensualist. Apparently those were stereotypes. You know what? They were freakin' descriptions!!

koan;633247 wrote: Extension on that last thought to give an example. I said there was a character who was an intellectual. Then there was a character who was a sensualist. Apparently those were stereotypes. You know what? They were freakin' descriptions!!


There is a huge difference between the two, at least in my mind. When someone calls another a sensualist I see description, when someone calls an entire country war mongers it is stereotyping. You can't stereotype a single person in my mind. That is just me though, I prefer to speak in the singular.

mann, If I knew I was being generalized and sterotyped, I would've worn nicer clothes....

just kiddin'....don't forget that we fantasize about having super powers too!!

Sterotyping,it's meaning I think depends on your point of view and what you believe in.

KB.;633256 wrote: There is a huge difference between the two, at least in my mind. When someone calls another a sensualist I see description, when someone calls an entire country war mongers it is stereotyping. You can't stereotype a single person in my mind. That is just me though, I prefer to speak in the singular.
You used the word "offense" in the thread about two fictional characters (individuals) just because for brevity I summarized their basic natures.

KB. wrote: I also take great offense (not from anyone here) that intellectual and sensationalist are separated. Worldly by its nature is more intelligent, unless we are describing intelligence as only book smarts, which any sensationalist if played correctly will have more than enough of that as well.

I don’t like labels, you can’t fit something as complex as a human being into one. The difference lies not in what they do, but who they are.


http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... ostcount=5

I, Rob wrote: Well stated. Our society loves the label, fairly clamors for branding. I blame Mad Av only in part; it's easier for them to sell product to people they've already neatly catagorized and stamped, but we let them do it. We allow them to set our examples of "successful living".

Let's each live for ourselves, not selfishly but with individuality.
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=22

All I'm saying is that at some point we need to choose words so that we may converse.

Being a Pheasy of deep thought and little brain. Are we stereotyping here or deciding on FG personalities? :-3

Define your idea of stereotyping please ? Are we lumping together all the depressed people, all the caring people, all the mean people, all the fun-loving people....etc....?

I initially thought it was a pretty nasty thing to try do, however after thought it would be quite nice to know what people really thought you were like.

I also tried my best to show the offense wasn't because of anything you said. You were describing two individuals, I was talking about the way in which they are grouped together not due to brevity, but because some people feel the need to pigeonhole. No one here has offended me in any way, well except for AF, but I know her personally. <-----that was a joke. I was more worried about RG taking what I said the wrong way after she posted what she did. I assure you that you can say whatever you feel like and I will respect it, at least you right to say it, even if I do not agree.

To further show my feelings I present you with a smiley:

yada yada (for Jimbo)

KB.;633281 wrote: I also tried my best to show the offense wasn't because of anything you said. You were describing two individuals, I was talking about the way in which they are grouped together not due to brevity, but because some people feel the need to pigeonhole. No one here has offended me in any way, well except for AF, but I know her personally.


I'm aware that you and I don't have a problem but I do have a problem with people attacking the use of words because the words didn't incorporate every possible aspect or angle. And I also figure you can handle being picked on.

^^^ "with people attacking" that is a generalisation NOT a stereotype and I find generalisations highly useful for starting conversations.

koan;633289 wrote: I'm aware that you and I don't have a problem but I do have a problem with people attacking the use of words because the words didn't incorporate every possible aspect or angle. And I also figure you can handle being picked on.



^^^ "with people attacking" that is a generalisation NOT a stereotype and I find generalisations highly useful for starting conversations.


Generally speaking youre not a Brit yet so you cant pull off using Brit spelling.

koan;633289 wrote: I'm aware that you and I don't have a problem but I do have a problem with people attacking the use of words because the words didn't incorporate every possible aspect or angle. And I also figure you can handle being picked on.

^^^ "with people attacking" that is a generalisation NOT a stereotype and I find generalisations highly useful for starting conversations.


We all do things for a reaction, oh hell did I generalize? I'm pretty thin skinned as well. I might be crying in my soup right now.

:yh_cry

Nomad;633296 wrote: Generally speaking youre not a Brit yet so you cant pull off using Brit spelling.


It's the Canadian way of spelling.

Canadian=correct

KB.;633298 wrote: We all do things for a reaction, oh hell did I generalize? I'm pretty thin skinned as well. I might be crying in my soup right now.

:yh_cry


I'm still trying to hit my 10 000th post here so I replied separately. :wah:

I should cry too. I've been called a bitch before and, generally, they are right.

koan;633299 wrote: It's the Canadian way of spelling.

Canadian=correct




Really ?

(thats all Ive got)

I wasnt prepared.

Pinky;633305 wrote: What Lon has done here isn't sterotyping, just conclusions that he's formulated about us. For instance, he might stereotype me as a bit of a bubblehead or girly because I join in with the fun stuff a lot of the time. People who actually know me will know this isn't true, so I couldn't give a flying chuff either way. As well as being a teacher, I'm also a motorbike riding history freak (strange combination, I know!)

He might decide to say brunettes are quiet and blondes are outgoing...again, something impossible to verify because it's simply not true.


Well said you!!:)

Pinky;633305 wrote: What Lon has done here isn't sterotyping, just conclusions that he's formulated about us. For instance, he might stereotype me as a bit of a bubblehead or girly because I join in with the fun stuff a lot of the time. People who actually know me will know this isn't true, so I couldn't give a flying chuff either way. As well as being a teacher, I'm also a motorbike riding history freak (strange combination, I know!)

He might decide to say brunettes are quiet and blondes are outgoing...again, something impossible to verify because it's simply not true.


I agree I do find this thread a little confusing. Are we expressing an opinion about people here, what we think they are like, or lumping them together? :-3

Well if we can choose, put me in the crazy, no holes barred, witchy mysterious, yet sexy and attractive category THANK YOU (NO REALLY I MEAN IT I WOULD BE SO GRATEFUL AND LOVE YOU ALL FOREVER):wah:

Uh-oh! You've been peeking!:sneaky: :wah:

Nomad;633302 wrote: Really ?

(thats all Ive got)

I wasnt prepared.


Why am I not surprised? :yh_giggle

almostfamous;633394 wrote: I think character assessment considers the aspects, and "meat" if you will, of one individual versus, say, a culture maybe? If it's character assessment of a culture, we'll just say Americans then what are we basing the assessment on? .. out of curiosity.



To me, stereotyping groups you with people that, in most cases, you may only share one quality alike with. Yet, because you share that one quality, however, unappealing it may be to some, you are automatically put into a category, be it culturally challenged or loud and lazy.



I'm not venting this at you Di :-4 It's just hard not to be a little bothered at the impression some may have and in the back of their mind, no matter how well we get on, I'm still in that category, you know? People are wishy washy enough that we don't need labels. :-6




Wishy washy ! This will be our 1st label. All the wishy washy's over there. Line up please.

Hmmmm wonders now what labels will be created lol

I was a fan of intellectual contributors from way back. I felt they added a much needed element of intellect. and sensebility to our enviornment which at the time was very combative, hostile, and often ignorant. I have been apalled lately to read threads that I find are condescending. and insensitive.

Its uncomfortable to feel that as we share information about ourselves, a sences is being taken to measure our worth, on the ricter scale of life.

To own, or not to own that is the question. Is a mans worth judged by the property he keeps, or by the measure of success he has achieved morally and spiritually. To watch on big screen, or small? Is he who owns small screen less of a human than he who hangs flat screen on the wall? Give me a break. The truth is, I live in a cardboard box. I cook my food over an open pit that I dug in the ground. I bathe in a livestock trough. I watch TV while crouched in the bushes under my neighbors window. I have no savings, IRAs, or life insurance. I am grateful for every breath I take and I have instructed my loved ones to have me cremated for 299.99 when the time comes, and to throw my ashes out over Afton Mountain.

weeder;633485 wrote: I was a fan of intellectual contributors from way back. I felt they added a much needed element of intellect. and sensebility to our enviornment which at the time was very combative, hostile, and often ignorant. I have been apalled lately to read threads that I find are condescending. and insensitive.

Its uncomfortable to feel that as we share information about ourselves, a sences is being taken to measure our worth, on the ricter scale of life.

To own, or not to own that is the question. Is a mans worth judged by the property he keeps, or by the measure of success he has achieved morally and spiritually. To watch on big screen, or small? Is he who owns small screen less of a human than he who hangs flat screen on the wall? Give me a break. The truth is, I live in a cardboard box. I cook my food over an open pit that I dug in the ground. I bathe in a livestock trough. I watch TV while crouched in the bushes under my neighbors window. I have no savings, IRAs, or life insurance. I am grateful for every breath I take and I have instructed my loved ones to have me cremated for 299.99 when the time comes, and to throw my ashes out over Afton Mountain.


Meet ya in the off topic thread, Weeder.

magenta flame;633487 wrote: but you do have a computer with an internet connection.


Public library, hun.

weeder;633485 wrote: I was a fan of intellectual contributors from way back. I felt they added a much needed element of intellect. and sensebility to our enviornment which at the time was very combative, hostile, and often ignorant. I have been apalled lately to read threads that I find are condescending. and insensitive.

Its uncomfortable to feel that as we share information about ourselves, a sences is being taken to measure our worth, on the ricter scale of life.

To own, or not to own that is the question. Is a mans worth judged by the property he keeps, or by the measure of success he has achieved morally and spiritually. To watch on big screen, or small? Is he who owns small screen less of a human than he who hangs flat screen on the wall? Give me a break. The truth is, I live in a cardboard box. I cook my food over an open pit that I dug in the ground. I bathe in a livestock trough. I watch TV while crouched in the bushes under my neighbors window. I have no savings, IRAs, or life insurance. I am grateful for every breath I take and I have instructed my loved ones to have me cremated for 299.99 when the time comes, and to throw my ashes out over Afton Mountain.


Weeder, I am trying to figure out your thought process. Why in the world would you think that asking the size and type of a TV or if someone rents or owns a home a judgemental thing ? I have no problem with your wish to live in a cardboard box and cook your food over an open pit and yea bathe in a livestock trough. I suspect that what you deem to be insensitive and condecending is merely your lack of self esteem and sense of insecurity.

No that's not a judgement, just an unqualified observation.

Some FG Members have absolutely no sense of humour

Some are overly sensitive

Some are quite poor

Others are well off

Some are ill

Some are well traveled

Some are stay at homes

Most are under age 45

Not many over 60

Some have had successes

Some have had some failures

Most have had both

Everyone wants to be happy

Everyone needs someone

Some are in love

Some were in love

Some want to be in love

Sounds to me like it's a bunch of humans in here.

Off Topic thread

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=28020

Sorry, it was late, I was tired. I shouldnt have written anything, and Ive never paid attention to the off topic thread, because I dont think Ive usually gone off topic. I got into my feeling for the underdog mode. Ill go back quietly to my dont think much about anything closet. I really did bathe in a livestock trough, for a year, in Georgia. It was great. Bye.

weeder;633606 wrote: Sorry, it was late, I was tired. I shouldnt have written anything, and Ive never paid attention to the off topic thread, because I dont think Ive usually gone off topic. I got into my feeling for the underdog mode. Ill go back quietly to my dont think much about anything closet. I really did bathe in a livestock trough, for a year, in Georgia. It was great. Bye.


:wah: Oh it's you in here, I was wondering who was in here with me. Bit dark, but warm and safe :wah: