Correspondent:: "Shining One" Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:25:28 -0500
--------
"Nomen Nescio" wrote in message
news:da495b4e8a5dca594295527a185777ee@dizum.com...
> JOHANNESBURG, South Africa (Reuters) -- A group of young South African
> men taking part in coming of age rituals due to include circumcision
> turned on their male nurse and killed him, an official said on Monday.
> Sizwe Kupelo of the Eastern Cape provincial health department said the
> men aged 18 to 25 beat the man to death with sticks at the site of
> their initiation ceremonies in Port Elizabeth on Friday.
Good for them !!! (clap-clap-clap-clap)
Any self-standing male anyplace on Earth, worthy of his
intended future use of the ever-diminishing planetary
O2 reserves of the Biosphere, should react like an
angered male baboon in heat and should do everything
up to cutting the head off at the shoulders of any kook
bastard attempting to cut even one millametere of
foreskin from off the male appendage.
(..this also proves Cat-o-Lick Heirarchy are wussies
and abusers because they do it to male infants who can't
fight back - how ANY Father of ANY boy can stand
idley by and watch, while some old bastard in a black
robe cuts the foreskin off of his kid's pecker boggles my mind!)
> "He was attacked by about 20 initiates who assaulted him, and he later
> died," Kupelo said.
>
> He said the attack followed complaints by the men that they were not
> being properly looked after during their initiation ceremonies, but
> did not elaborate.
"...not being properly looked after during their initiation ceremonies" ???
You mean they have priest kid abusers with bonz-thru-their-noses over
there in Bongo-Bongo Land in Africkka too....? This story truly bears
further
investigation! : )
> The nurse had been in charge of caring for the men ahead of their
> circumcision.
Lemme guess.....he wanted to use mouth-to-ween to staunch the
bleeding instead of using his loincloth like all the other
witch doctors usually do..?
> In recent years, the practice of circumcision has come under scrutiny
> as dozens of boys have been accidentally killed or mutilated by
> amateur elders who have seized on the tradition as a way to make
> money.
It figures....!
The dammed bobbin-at-the-Wall type joos STARTED this whole goofy practice
of whackin-off-the-hood-from-the-male-torpedo in the first place!
Is this the root-cause why jewish boys long to pork shiskas instead
of "nice jewish girls" ?
Looks like Kuntakintae of the Zoolues wanted to cash into this..?
Also, how much is the Temple cover-charge for a good chop these
days anyway...?
> Kupelo said in the Eastern Cape at least 10 young men had died during
> the current initiation period, which began in December.
>
> Chairman of the Eastern Cape House of Traditional Leaders, Chief
> Ngangomhlaba Matanzima, condemned the attack, which he said showed
> there were "serious problems" around initiations.
Reading that news quote above reminded of that classic SNL bit where they
demonstrate the
smooth ride of the full size Lincoln Continental by doin a circumsision
in the back seat while drivin down alleys in Brooklyn or Queens....)
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:53:25 +0000
--------
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:25:28 -0500, "Shining One"
wrote:
In what respect are you a Shining One, Shining One? It's surely not
the bright light of intelligence. Perhaps you have a flashlight stuck
up your arse.
>Good for them !!! (clap-clap-clap-clap)
>
>Any self-standing male anyplace on Earth, worthy of his
>intended future use of the ever-diminishing planetary
>O2 reserves of the Biosphere, should react like an
>angered male baboon in heat and should do everything
>up to cutting the head off at the shoulders of any kook
>bastard attempting to cut even one millametere of
>foreskin from off the male appendage.
Male baboons don't go in heat, cretin. You need ovaries before you
can go in heat.
>(..this also proves Cat-o-Lick Heirarchy are wussies
>and abusers because they do it to male infants who can't
>fight back - how ANY Father of ANY boy can stand
>idley by and watch, while some old bastard in a black
>robe cuts the foreskin off of his kid's pecker boggles my mind!)
Haven't you got your religions a little confused here, Shining One?
Catholic circumcisors? You'll be whining about Jewish Cardinals,
next. You're one bewildered puppy.
I snipped the rest because you were beginning to rave. Did your
keyboard get wet with all that foaming at the mouth? I see Mr.
Schnerd has recommended Prozac for your much more intelligent and sane
fellow-whiner, Bob. I suspect that the drugs would be wasted on you
Shiting One, but I'm prepared to give you a good slap round the ears
with an iron bar in the hope that it might reactivate some part of
your moribund brain.
Be suitably grateful. Now fuck off out of alt.t before I hack your
foreskin off with a blunt spoon.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:59:17 -0500
--------
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:53:25 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>MYou need ovaries before you
>can go in heat.
Tell that to a male elephant in must.
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 02:10:32 +0000
--------
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:59:17 -0500, Dan Drake
wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:53:25 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
> wrote:
>
>>MYou need ovaries before you
>>can go in heat.
>
>Tell that to a male elephant in must.
Not the same thing. That's like stags going into rut. It's a
response to oestrus in females. "Oestrus" = "in heat" but is not so
illiterately expressed.
Please resist the temptation to rush in and compound the mind-numbing
ignorance of these witless cunts posting from strange groups, Dan.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:50:16 -0500
--------
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 02:10:32 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:59:17 -0500, Dan Drake
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:53:25 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
>> wrote:
>>
>>>MYou need ovaries before you
>>>can go in heat.
>>
>>Tell that to a male elephant in must.
>
>Not the same thing. That's like stags going into rut. It's a
>response to oestrus in females. "Oestrus" = "in heat" but is not so
>illiterately expressed.
Argue semantics if you like, and you're probably right about heat and
oestrus, but the fact remains that male elephants periodically go into
must whether or not a fruity female elephant is within range.
And when a male elephant is in must, then he's not to be fucked with,
unless you offer him a receptive female elephant, or you have already
scraped the crud off from behind his ears. A bit like the SR, really.
Ask a mahout.
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 08:00:17 +0000
--------
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:50:16 -0500, Dan Drake
wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 02:10:32 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
> wrote:
>
>>Not the same thing. That's like stags going into rut. It's a
>>response to oestrus in females. "Oestrus" = "in heat" but is not so
>>illiterately expressed.
>
>Argue semantics if you like, and you're probably right about heat and
>oestrus, but the fact remains that male elephants periodically go into
>must whether or not a fruity female elephant is within range.
It's a little more than semantics. More elementary biology. It's
called heat because the female's vaginal temperature rises during
oestrus. That's why artificial insemination operatives (now there's a
good job) carry a thermometer. Saves 'em wasting good spunk on a
female that has passed the period of optimum fertility. Clearly, this
phenomen cannot be replicated in the male of the species as it lacks a
vagina. I may not have your profound and first-hand knowledge of
pachyderm's genitals, Dan, but on the other hand I don't mistake one
discrete phenomenon for another and then dig my heels in about it.
>
>And when a male elephant is in must, then he's not to be fucked with,
>unless you offer him a receptive female elephant, or you have already
>scraped the crud off from behind his ears. A bit like the SR, really.
That may well be the case, but I fail to see how this can back your
rather peculiar assertion that male animals go into heat.
>
>Ask a mahout.
I meet them so rarely.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 06:15:11 -0500
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 08:00:17 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>It's a little more than semantics. More elementary biology. It's
>called heat because the female's vaginal temperature rises during
>oestrus.
The OED says: "Sexual excitement or desire. Now only, (the period of)
a female animal's readiness for mating: esp in 'on heat,' (Chiefly US)
'in heat' ME."
I'm sure the Middle English were running around poking their highly
accurate thermometers up their she-animals' pussies all the time...
>That may well be the case, but I fail to see how this can back your
>rather peculiar assertion that male animals go into heat.
It seems like male animals used to get sexual heat, but they don't any
more. Maybe you know something about that?
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:22:31 +0000
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 06:15:11 -0500, Dan Drake
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 08:00:17 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
> wrote:
>
>>It's a little more than semantics. More elementary biology. It's
>>called heat because the female's vaginal temperature rises during
>>oestrus.
>
>The OED says: "Sexual excitement or desire. Now only, (the period of)
>a female animal's readiness for mating: esp in 'on heat,' (Chiefly US)
>'in heat' ME."
Your excursion into the arcana of the OED doesn't seem to have
furthered your cause one jot or tittle, Dan, me boy. I had a quick
squint in my Lloyd's Encyclopaedic Dictionary (1895) but there was no
entry for the sexual connotation of "heat", possibly because them
godly Victorians averted their eyes from dirty shit like that while
bungholing the manservant over the dining-room table.
>
>I'm sure the Middle English were running around poking their highly
>accurate thermometers up their she-animals' pussies all the time...
To get the minor technicalities out of the road, Middle English was
what they spoke, not who they were. Who they were, was the
predominantly rural early medieval yeomanry. Don't decry them. They
may not have had our technology but their powers of observation were
pretty good. I'm sure they could tell a cow's cunt from an elephant's
pizzle, and lacking thermometers I expect they thrust their highly
accurate and sensitive FINGERS up the snatch of the cow, ewe, goat or
whatever and were discerning enough to know whether the raised
temperature indicated it was fucking time. Being quite logical about
this, we can be sure that it was so. Had medieval man or any of our
forebears been unable to manage this simple element of stock
husbandry, we probably wouldn't be around as a species any more.
>
>>That may well be the case, but I fail to see how this can back your
>>rather peculiar assertion that male animals go into heat.
>
>It seems like male animals used to get sexual heat, but they don't any
>more. Maybe you know something about that?
Oh, dear. How fucking persistent you are. I admire a captain that
goes down with his ship, though. Male animals, men included, may
imagine that they are hot (or even hawt) when aroused. They mistake
ardour for temperature. It may that due to the rush of blood to the
penis during erection, that organ becomes warmer by a minuscule
proportion. I don't know. But it certainly isn't an easily
measurable indicator of peak fertility, as it is in the females of
some species. It isn't "going in (or on) heat. It's just a stiffie.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:58:34 -0500
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:22:31 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>Your excursion into the arcana of the OED doesn't seem to have
>furthered your cause one jot or tittle, Dan, me boy. I had a quick
>squint in my Lloyd's Encyclopaedic Dictionary (1895) but there was no
>entry for the sexual connotation of "heat", possibly because them
>godly Victorians averted their eyes from dirty shit like that while
>bungholing the manservant over the dining-room table.
So give us a dictionary cite that supports *your* derivation of 'in
heat,' then.
>To get the minor technicalities out of the road, Middle English was
>what they spoke, not who they were.
I know that, and I think you know what I meant. *You* need to deal
with the *major* technicality of providing us a dictionary definition
that says that 'in heat' is derived from the elevated temperature of
the pussy. Middle English, if you can...
>>It seems like male animals used to get sexual heat, but they don't any
>>more. Maybe you know something about that?
>
>Oh, dear. How fucking persistent you are. I admire a captain that
>goes down with his ship, though.
Not persistent, or going down with any ship. Just a tad bored and
looking for amusement, to be honest.
Get back to us with the cite to support your assertion, or go down
with *your* ship. Happy hunting.
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:57:30 +0000
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:58:34 -0500, Dan Drake
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:22:31 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
> wrote:
>
>>Your excursion into the arcana of the OED doesn't seem to have
>>furthered your cause one jot or tittle, Dan, me boy. I had a quick
>>squint in my Lloyd's Encyclopaedic Dictionary (1895) but there was no
>>entry for the sexual connotation of "heat", possibly because them
>>godly Victorians averted their eyes from dirty shit like that while
>>bungholing the manservant over the dining-room table.
>
>So give us a dictionary cite that supports *your* derivation of 'in
>heat,' then.
In what you left quoted above, I had made it clear that my dictionary
didn't cover that derivation, so you thought you scented a little
weakness, did you, Dan? You play dirty and I like that.
First off, your own quote from the OED supported my position rather
well and kicked yours out into the long grass. That doesn't seem to
have sunk in yet, but in the days and months to come...
Secondly, for the odd occasion when I develop a passing interest in
anything that wasn't around in 1895 and is therefore not in the
admirable Lloyd's, I have a coupla fall-back dictionaries. They're
lowbrow quick fix dictionaries which I hold in all the regard that a
Dowager Duchess has for a dog-turd on her flowered Wilton, but you
asked.
The eighth meaning of "heat" in Collins Concise Dictionary and
Thesaurus (2002) is, "in or on heat (of some female mammals) ready for
mating."
The Concise Oxford Dictionary (1974) says: "Sexual excitement of
animals during the breeding season (on, in, at ~ of females)
So that I did not appear disobliging, I even consulted an online
dictionary, though I don't hold with using the internet for things
other than abusing people in usenet, downloading pornography and
stealing software. Anyone who would normally even CONCEIVE of
consulting an online dictionary is absolute despicable sewer and a
degenerate.
Anyway, dictionary.com, in its laconic way, confines itself to the
single word "estrus", spelled in the quaint colonial manner. Oestrus
applies only to *female* mammals, Dan.
Now that we've got that dry and tedious exercise out of the way, open
the seacocks and scuttle yer tub, Dan. You're fucked. Salute as you
go under. You're going down to Davey Jones Locker, Dan me boy.
Yo, ho, ho and a bottle of rum,
16 men on the dead man's chest...
R.I.P Dan Drake, buried at sea this 6th Day of January 2005. Cut off
by heat in the prime of life. A-fucking-men.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 18:19:54 -0500
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:57:30 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>In what you left quoted above, I had made it clear that my dictionary
>didn't cover that derivation, so you thought you scented a little
>weakness, did you, Dan? You play dirty and I like that.
You assert that the derivation of 'in heat' is the temperature of the
pussy, right?
Stop obfuscating, and provide a fucking cite for your position or shut
the fuck up. It's really that simple, for all the dancing around that
you're doing.
Let me put it in simple words that even a drunken old Scot will
understand. Where is there a credible source that says that the
derivation of 'on heat' is the temperature of the pussy?
Just answer the fucking question, Gordon! No more straw men. Or just
hold your nose and go down with your ship, like the good little
subservient knob-gobbling Scot that you are.
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: Semolina Pilchard Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 00:51:24 +0000
--------
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 18:19:54 -0500, Dan Drake
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:57:30 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
> wrote:
>
>>In what you left quoted above, I had made it clear that my dictionary
>>didn't cover that derivation, so you thought you scented a little
>>weakness, did you, Dan? You play dirty and I like that.
>
>You assert that the derivation of 'in heat' is the temperature of the
>pussy, right?
>
>Stop obfuscating, and provide a fucking cite for your position or shut
>the fuck up. It's really that simple, for all the dancing around that
>you're doing.
>
>Let me put it in simple words that even a drunken old Scot will
>understand. Where is there a credible source that says that the
>derivation of 'on heat' is the temperature of the pussy?
>
>Just answer the fucking question, Gordon! No more straw men. Or just
>hold your nose and go down with your ship, like the good little
>subservient knob-gobbling Scot that you are.
No obfuscation, Dan, no straw men and no dancing around. You asked
for definitions that supported my position; I gave you a multiplicity
of them. They don't suit you because they prove you WRONG, Dan, so
you move the goal posts and ask for something else. It's so, so sad
that a grown man should invest so heavily in not being proved wrong
over a triviality that he stoops to such tactics. It just screams
LOSER.
Now, being a loser's bad enough, Dan. Nobody wants to be one, but
some people just are. You should have made the best of it with good
grace and a touch of humour, but no. You had to be a BAD loser, Dan,
and descend to the ad hominems, the nationality, the supposed
drunkenness and the knob-gobbling. Tcchh, tcchh, (shakes head
wearily).
Next time you find a bull elephant in heat, Dan, I suggest you fuck
it. Or the mahout. Or yourself.
--
Sem
Correspondent:: Dan Drake Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:10:41 -0500
--------
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 00:51:24 +0000, Semolina Pilchard
wrote:
>>You assert that the derivation of 'in heat' is the temperature of the
>>pussy, right?
>>
>>Stop obfuscating, and provide a fucking cite for your position or shut
>>the fuck up. It's really that simple, for all the dancing around that
>>you're doing.
>>
>>Let me put it in simple words that even a drunken old Scot will
>>understand. Where is there a credible source that says that the
>>derivation of 'on heat' is the temperature of the pussy?
>>
>>Just answer the fucking question, Gordon! No more straw men. Or just
>>hold your nose and go down with your ship, like the good little
>>subservient knob-gobbling Scot that you are.
>
>No obfuscation, Dan, no straw men and no dancing around. You asked
>for definitions that supported my position; I gave you a multiplicity
>of them. They don't suit you because they prove you WRONG, Dan, so
>you move the goal posts and ask for something else. It's so, so sad
>that a grown man should invest so heavily in not being proved wrong
>over a triviality that he stoops to such tactics. It just screams
>LOSER.
Gordon, you loveable old drowning fool. What part of 'answer the
fucking question' don't you understand? You asserted that the meaning
of 'on heat' is derived from the actual temperature of the pussy, did
you not?
Maybe I have a crappy newsfeed or something, because I sure missed
where you cited any, let alone a credible, source for your assertion.
Middle English or otherwise...
In case I missed it, do me a favo(u)r, and tell me again what/where
your source is. Apart from 'because I said so,' of course.
Can you understand what I'm asking? WHERE IS 'ON HEAT' DEFINED AS
HIGHER THAN NORMAL PUSSY TEMPERATURE? Sorry to shout, but I can't
think what else to do to penetrate your somewhat dubious and probably
ethanol-enhanced consciousness.
*snork*
--
Dan Drake
Correspondent:: "angelicusrex" Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:43:55 -0700
--------
Who the fuck cares about being in heat? A human being can get their mojo
workin' any time of the day or night. If you are so worried about all this
pap, take it to alt.veterinarians.doggyheat...
Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:28:03 -0600
--------
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:43:55 -0700, "angelicusrex"
wrote:
>Who the fuck cares about being in heat? A human being can get their mojo
>workin' any time of the day or night. If you are so worried about all this
>pap, take it to alt.veterinarians.doggyheat...
>
>Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
>
um..scuse..but being in heat is like being giddy and your tootie is
really hungry for touchy feely, it's good
yes turn up the heat
mmmmrrrrrrrooowwwwrrrrrrrrr??
Correspondent:: "angelicusrex" Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 21:47:47 -0700
--------
"HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" wrote in
message news:omsrt018p02nm6uqpq9l5ot96ioacskr32@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:43:55 -0700, "angelicusrex"
> wrote:
>
>>Who the fuck cares about being in heat? A human being can get their mojo
>>workin' any time of the day or night. If you are so worried about all this
>>pap, take it to alt.veterinarians.doggyheat...
>>
>>Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
>>
>
> um..scuse..but being in heat is like being giddy and your tootie is
> really hungry for touchy feely, it's good
>
> yes turn up the heat
>
> mmmmrrrrrrrooowwwwrrrrrrrrr??
Is your pussy hot? According to some weirdo it means you are in heat. Which
means you must be in heat every day of the year! However I know something
that'll cool your jets. baby let me bang your box, baby let me bang your
box, baby let me play your eighty-eights, baby let me bang your box!
Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
Correspondent:: Pantheras Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 02:37:29 GMT
--------
angelicusrex wrote:
> Who the fuck cares about being in heat? A human being can get their mojo
> workin' any time of the day or night. If you are so worried about all this
> pap, take it to alt.veterinarians.doggyheat...
>
> Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
>
>
You are making a big splash with a post like this in alt.tasteless. I
assume that you fit right in the other groups that you cross posted to.
Do your self a favor and watch what groups you post to from now on.
Correspondent:: "angelicusrex" Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 21:51:04 -0700
--------
"Pantheras" wrote in message
news:JBmDd.2508$Pm6.1504@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> angelicusrex wrote:
>> Who the fuck cares about being in heat? A human being can get their mojo
>> workin' any time of the day or night. If you are so worried about all
>> this pap, take it to alt.veterinarians.doggyheat...
>>
>> Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
> You are making a big splash with a post like this in alt.tasteless. I
> assume that you fit right in the other groups that you cross posted to.
> Do your self a favor and watch what groups you post to from now on.
And exactly what would I be watching for, Pope Joan? Malignant growths? A
change to a wart or mole? An issue of blood? I think all of alt.tasteless'
taste is in their mouths.
By the way, I crosspiss, er- post where I want too. I didn't see a no
tr-ASS-p-ASS-ing sign anywhere.
Archimandrite Pudlevitcz
Correspondent:: "father" Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 00:14:32 -0500
--------
"Dan Drake" wrote in message
news:ltemt091kekfoa7e5svlslbh7ibnfajar5@4ax.com...
> Tell that to a male elephant in must.
> --
> Dan Drake