VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:40:48 06/02/02 Sun
Author: tim (ex. C.R.F.C.)
Subject: Re:!
In reply to: yasmin 's message, "Re:!" on 07:24:49 06/01/02 Sat


first of all it is not valid let alone 'clearly valid'. Valid suggests that it it sound, which is not.

you 'and others' have thought this through have you? is that you and your other Denmark Road intellectuals that i am sure are familar with rugby as you you are with applying justafiable amounts of analysis.

My good friend Rich Umbers has played the sport, but (with respect) not very much and, most importantly, NOT VOLENTARILY. I am aware there are large amounts of physical contact, especially in the scrum but if you have to grab hold of someones leg its because you have to- there is nothing sexual about it.

As for "and we should be open to a wide variety of perspectives"- what like 'KILL ALL THE JEWS' or 'LETS WEAR CARPETS ON OUR HEADS'. No of course not.

"Obviously my examples do not prove without doubt my theory to be correct but it provides some support for my arguement." WHAT SUPPORT you have said nothing that would suggest that rugby is anything sexual at all. I barely think you saying that there is 'dodgy contact' provides much support for your argument.

Anyway there isn't much dodgy contact anyway for fucks sake!

"ooo and under post modernism, i can claim i am right, but that would be awfully cocky of me so i wont. but no one is gonna tell me i'm wrong either. yay." well this provides support for my argument that you thrive on bullshit.


bye


>lol. Its my interpretation of Rugby and as
>interpretations go, its clearly a valid one. Now if i
>said Rugby was the tamest alternaitve to tennis or
>something completely ridiculous and random like that
>with no ground for support, i would understand ur
>flippancy. But I and others have thought this out.
>
>I am not saying i am rite. just that it is one
>perspective and we should be open to a wide variety of
>perspectives. You say u have played rugby tim and u
>feel me to be incorrect but then on the opposite side
>of the scale, Rich too has played rugby and he agrees
>wit me.
>
>And my theory cannot b scrapped without evidence to
>prove otherwise. I have stated my case and watched
>rugby to give the examples i have. Obviously my
>examples do not prove without doubt my theory to be
>correct but it provides some support for my arguement.
> But then as with all theories in sociology and
>psycology have faults in them or do not have enough
>evidence, but this does not stop them from being
>recognised, not as an absolute truth but as one
>intepretation.
>
>ooo and under post modernism, i can claim i am right,
>but that would be awfully cocky of me so i wont. but
>no one is gonna tell me i'm wrong either. yay.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.