Jump to content

Jennie

Members
  • Content Count

    761
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jennie

  1. Just checking in to report that I have still not even seen a copper egg since the release date.
  2. My eggs just started to hatch today, because I prefer to let mine mature slowly. I did finally incubate them, once they got down under 4 days, though. I just don't like to force them to grow up too fast.
  3. Book Number:10 Number Of Pages:345 Book Title:Holy Thief Author:William Ryan Summary:Moscow, 1936. Captain Alexei Dmitriyevich Korolev of the Moscow Militia is investigating a terrible crime. A young woman has been murdered and her mutilated body displayed on the altar of what had once been a local church. Captain Korolev is still a Believer in Stalinist Russia, when if discovered, he could be sent to the Zone, in Siberia. But now other dangers await him, because the murderer may not be some random lunatic, but someone very powerful indeed, and Korolev could find himself the next victim.
  4. Yes. Also the idea that if you don't belong to group x, that you cannot possibly have had similar problems or experiences in life, or if you did, your 'privilege' made up for it, and that you should never mention those similar experiences because that's 'appropriation'. I thought we were all human, and that the sharing of life experiences was one of the comforts of being human and being able to tell our stories. For example, LGBT people often get bullied in school. It's now starting to seem, via the media, that ONLY LGBT people get bullied in school. This is not true. I'm not LGBT, but I was horribly bullied. However, if I were to point that out, some people would accuse me of trying to appropriate their experiences, or trying to 'derail' the conversation. Or they'd say I couldn't possibly have suffered as much as LGBT children do. This kind of thing gets us nowhere in my opinion, it only puts up dividing walls. A few years ago, a former online 'friend' of mine started referring to 'White Women's Tears'. As far as I know, she's White herself. Certainly she's never talked about her experiences as an African American, or Asian American. She does talk a lot about bigotry, which is fine as far as it goes, but then she started to use this phrase, which seems to suggest that White women cannot feel authentic pain, or cannot legitimately cry. If White women cry, in other words, it's all crocodile tears, or an attempt to appropriate the pain that People of Colour suffer. A similar phrase, I suppose, would be 'Straight People's Tears'. Only a few decades ago, there were laws throughout a good part of the US, which made it illegal for heterosexuals of different races from marrying, and that fact has been raised a lot during the debate on Equal Marriage for LGBT people. That fact has been very useful in the debate, because it shows how minds can be changed, and laws can be changed without destroying all of society, and also that bigotry really knows no boundaries.
  5. Dark Forest green is my favourite colour, though red comes in second, and I love it so much as an accent colour.
  6. I grew up in a small town, too. The word gay meant happy, and homosexuality was the applicable word, but it was never mentioned either. I was taught as a child that everyone was equal and loved by God. It was only later on in my adolescence that various codicils were added that made it clear that certain people weren't included in 'everyone'. Women were to be respected, but we weren't actually entitled to the same rights as men. People of 'other races' weren't quite up to snuff. And when I finally heard about gays and lesbians? They were the scum of the earth. You had to whisper about them, because mentioning them out loud might attract the attention of Satan, their master. I moved, too, but somehow I survived. And I don't know what you mean by 'everywhere' exactly. Are gays and lesbians camping out on your front lawn? (Pun intended!) Are LGBT people showing up at your door demanding you accept their relationships to the extent of having them to dinner? Are they trying to change your sexuality in any way? I think what you mean by 'everywhere', is that back in your small town any LGBT people were in the closet, and now they're not. Now they're living like any other people, but also making an issue out of it, so they can have equal rights. And you don't get that at all, because you don't know the history of LGBT people and how at one time they had NO RIGHTS. LGBT people could be fired from their jobs. The police regularly beat them with impunity, if the gay bashers didn't get there first. If gay men didn't get beaten to death, they could be sent to prison for life. It was not actually illegal to be a lesbian, but that didn't mean lesbians had it good otherwise. They could still be fired or lose the rights to their children. It was actually illegal in many places for gays and lesbians to congregate, and the police raided meetings of LGBT people and arrested everyone there. I'm not making any of this up. And if you go back a few centuries in time, you'd be back in the days when gay men were sentenced to death, for what was called sodomy. So, I agree with the advice someone gave earlier, to read up on this subject. Then maybe you -- and by you I mean anyone who thinks this isn't a worthy subject for debate -- then maybe you might understand why LGBT people don't want to hide away in the closet and want to speak up to consolidate their rights. ETA: I forgot to mention a whole lot of stuff that would turn my post into a book, but I had to come back to add that LGBT people at one time could be ordered by the courts to undergo 'therapy' that included all kinds of tortures and abuses. Drugs that made them vomit when they looked at pictures of attractive people of their own gender, for one thing.
  7. Not randomly, and not just in one day, usually, but people do change their opinions over time, even older people. :-) I haven't gone to check your profile to see how old you are, but it's likely you're younger than I am, and so don't personally remember the concepts about gays and lesbians most of society was burdened with only a few decades ago. Those concepts and the resulting attitudes were appalling, but they were seen as the only natural ones, because everyone seemed to share them. I'm not gay, but somehow I escaped being brainwashed into sharing them. When I spoke up about how wrong I thought those concepts and attitudes were, I got a lot of flack I can tell you. Younger people who didn't live in those times can read about it all, but that's not quite like experiencing it first hand. Attitudes have really changed, and it didn't happen randomly, by accident, it happened because people spoke up. People marched and demonstrated for equal rights, they weren't handed over on a silver platter because someone felt generous that day. And there were lots of other problems in the world way back then, too. :-)
  8. I just caught my third desert egg, so I'm done for now. Whew! That wasn't too bad. The new eggs are still dropping every five minutes, and if you hang out in coastal or desert it's still pretty easy to catch one. There seem to be more of the new coastal eggs than of the desert ones, so maybe they're going to be more common later on, too?
  9. Okay, I already had one egg on my scroll, so I could only catch five new ones, but I did. Three coastals and two deserts. That's it for tonight. :-)
  10. I have two deserts but no coastals yet.
  11. Okay, but he was suffering from PST after being abandoned by his mother and set adrift on the river in a basket. So yeah, he was a seriously disturbed and confused individual. I'm not trying to trap anyone into anything. What good would that do? I'm trying to point out how illogical it is to state that anyone could believe and follow everything that's written in the Bible. And I'm also trying to point out that if someone says such a thing in reference to Gays and Lesbians, when it is impossible for them to believe and follow everything in the Bible themselves, that they are being unjust. That's not some kind of tricky sophistry, it's just the truth.
  12. If you meant me: Matthew 22:37. Again, if you were responding to what I said about Paul and his opinions: The laws in the OT, including Leviticus and Deuteronomy, grew over time, I think. They weren't written by one person, unless he were an extremely disturbed and confused individual. And again, I say unto you, that in that case, you must not eat pork or wear two fabrics together, and you must keep slaves and stone your daughter if she loses her virginity before marriage, and a whole lot of other things you probably don't even think about. But those arcane laws don't apply to you, only to Gays and Lesbians. Because we live in the 21st century, but they live back in Biblical times. Right? ETA: Sorry, Odeen, I wasn't addressing you here, but the people who follow those passages. I just realized it looked like I was arguing with you. Sorry. :-)
  13. Yes, but this is simply the opinion of one person. Truly, truly it is. Paul was Jewish, and grew up learning the OT. He never even met Jesus, as I pointed out earlier. The reason I'm saying this is to show that he'd grown up with all the prejudices against the pagans that I mentioned, along with a lot of other prejudices common to men of his time. Even Paul himself says that people should realize this, that whatever he says is not the word of God but only his own imperfect version of it. Paul believes that gays and lesbians aren't born that way, but become that way because of sin. This was just his way of explaining something he couldn't understand. He saw only one way of looking at the situation: the Bible says it's an abomination, yet here we have people sleeping with their own gender. Why? It must be because God abandoned them. The concept that perhaps this is natural for some people never entered his mind, because that wasn't the way he'd been taught. That whole passage about 'shameful lusts' is Paul demonizing something he can't understand. We think differently today, because of all the studies of gays and lesbians and the fact that they have the freedom to speak up and tell us how they feel. They're no more shameful and lust-filled than anyone else. So, I don't understand how you can claim that this somehow 'proves' anything. It's just one more bigotted statement from someone who hasn't even tried to see gays and lesbians as human.
  14. I just think that if someone says, 'I have to believe the entire Bible. I can't just pick and choose things because of cultural change,' that this means you have to believe the entire Bible. And I don't know how anyone can do this in the 21st century. Whether we like it or not, our culture is very different from that of biblical times, even NT times. So, I don't see how anyone can expect Gays and Lesbians to live as though we were still back in biblical times, when heterosexuals are allowed to live in the 21st century. I mean, I can't see how someone can possibly point to Gays and Lesbians and say, 'They're sinners because it says so in the Bible!' and then turn around and claim it's okay for them to eat pork and wear two different fabrics at one time and so on. The passages that forbid two men lying together -- and it is two MEN, not two WOMEN -- occur in the same part of the bible. So, why does one passage apply today, and not another? Clearly we do have to pick and choose which passages to believe and follow, and in fact, everyone does and probably everyone always has picked and chosen. What makes for a better and more just society? Jesus said the relevant things were to love God, and to love your neighbour as yourself. That I have no trouble believing, though it can sometimes be hard to follow, especially when your neighbour wakes you up in the middle of the night playing loud music. :-)
  15. No, they just went along with the statements in the OT, in the Holiness Code, which said that two men lying together was an abomination. The pagans around them did not look on same-sex relations that way. The ancient Greeks thought love between two men was better than heterosexual love. The Romans didn't go quite that far, but they didn't see it as abominable. So, you also believe the parts of the Bible that say that we can't wear clothes made of two different fabrics and that slavery is okay, and that when an army defeats another nation it's okay for the men to claim all the women as their wives and that if a woman isn't a virgin on her wedding night she should be dragged out and stoned?
  16. Why would this make some sort of difference? Most of the rules in the books of the OT which make statements about the 'abomination' of a man lying with another man as with a woman, have to do with the Holiness Code, which was intended to mark a separation between the Jews and the evil pagan peoples around them. 'God' had ordered the Jews to kill all these pagans whenever possible, but he also wanted the Jews to make it clear that they were separate from them. Since most civilizations at that time didn't see any big problem with homosexuality, the Jews needed to develop that problem to stress their differences. Who at that time was going to write: 'Oh, by the way, homosexuality isn't wrong!' That was what the evil pagans thought. Later on, by the time of the NT, we don't see Jesus saying that it's wrong or not wrong. Or, at least no one wrote such words down. The Jews were still maintaining their separation from the pagans, and Christianity was a religion that sprang from Judaism. Saint Paul says it's wrong, but he never met Jesus. But again, Christianity wanted to keep its separation from the pagans. Pagans usually didn't care that much about gay sex and so on. In order to stress how wrong paganism was, Christianity had to call this sort of attitude sinful. No, this is most certainly not righteous. But this is about rape and murder in a heterosexual context, which seems to me to have nothing to do with a righteous homosexual love. Maybe David behaved this way because he lost his mind after Jonathan died, or because he became too powerful and thought everything he did was right and good. But I don't see why the way he treated Bathsheba smears his relationship with Jonathan, which was years in the past.
  17. Actually, at one time, and not all that long ago, this was the case. The Roman Catholic church at least forbade people who were known to be unable to reproduce, such as men who had been gelded, from marrying. There was a famous case of a Castrato -- a man who had been gelded in childhood to preserve his beautiful voice. He fell in love with a woman, and they desperately wanted to marry, but the church denied them the right, and they both died not long after. It is believed they died of broken hearts, because they longed to be able to marry. This was several centuries ago, but I think there was a similar case not all that long ago. Just a few decades ago, I think. I need to google this, as soon as I have the time to wade through a ton of links. :-) Some theologians actually made the connection you just mentioned, but in a negative way. They claimed that if the church decided that the prohibition against birth control, and against people known to be unable to reproduce, were dropped, then there would be no logical prohibition against homosexuality. In my opinion, this is why the Roman Catholic church still holds that birth control should be forbidden. As I say, this is just my opinion. ETA: I thought I should make it clear that I am totally in favour of equal marriage for gays and lesbians, and in favour of equal rights in every other way. I always have been. :-)
  18. Book Number:8 Number Of Pages:426 Book Title:The Rope Dancer Author:Roberta Gellis Summary:Carys is a rope dancer -- a highly skilled high wire artist -- in medieval England. When her entire troop of jugglers and acrobats is killed, she faces a life of hardship and possibly being forced to turn to prostitution to survive. Then she meets Telor and his friend, Deri the Dwarf, and together they begin to form a new troop, even better than the one she lost. Rating: (optional) Review: (optional)This is one of my favourite Roberta Gellis historical romances. Carys is an entrancing heroine and the details of the lives of medieval entertainers is fascinating. * Book Number:9 Number Of Pages:262 Book Title:Blameless Author:Gail Carriger Summary:Part three of a series of fantasy novels about Alexia Tarabotti, a preternatural curse breaker. In this book, Alexia is accused of unfaithfulness by her husband, and in her attempts to prove him wrong and make him grovel, she ends up in the hands of the Templars and an evil scientist hellbent on using her for experiments, including vivisection.
  19. I totally agree, but the problem is, sometimes books are recommended as being 'good', or everyone is talking about them, so people are curious and want to see what all the fuss is about. I'm a big fan of vampires, so I'm always looking for a new vampire book to read -- or at least I was before coming across Twilight. I'd heard a lot about it, and they were filming the first movie here in Vancouver. I found the paperback and leafed through it and saw that it was set on the Pacific coast and Vancouver was mentioned. Those things sold me on it, so I got the book and started reading. Halfway through I hurled it across the room and haven't opened it since. I think it's still lying there under my dresser, maybe being eaten by bookworms, if even they can stomach it. :-)
  20. I still have only seen one copper since the day of release. One. And of course I was so stunned I moved too slowly to grab it. :-(
  21. Book Number:7 Number Of Pages:259 Book Title:Changeless Author:Gail Carriger Summary:This book is the second book in a series about Alexia Tarabotti, a preternatural, a curse-breaker, who lives in an alternate Victorian England, which is populated by vampires and werewolves and other supernatural creatures, in addition to ordinary humans. In this particular book, the werewolves and vampires are threatened by some sort of spell or poison which is turning them back into ordinary humans, and most of them don't like it. Alexia is charged with finding out what is wrong.
  22. Book Number:6 Number Of Pages:357 Book Title:The Anatomist's Wife Author:Anna Lee Huber Summary:Lady Darby, the widow of an anatomist, Sir Anthony Darby, finds herself involved in a murder case in 1830 Scotland. Kiera is an artist who had been forced by her husband to sketch the dead bodies he dissected. In the early 19th century, people were afraid of anatomists, after the case of Burke and Hare came to light. Kiera is therefore suspected of the murder and must help investigate in order to clear her own name. Rating: Fair Review:I've given this book a 'fair' rating, because it's a bit spotty. The mystery itself is good, with a cleverly hidden clue early on. I found other aspects of the story, including an incipient romance, a bit annoying, stereotypical, and repetitive. It is set in the early 19th century, and in Scotland at that, and in general women tend to be repressed and controlled. Kiera's husband ordered her to do the sketches for his dissections, but I got a bit tired of being constantly reminded of this. Burke and Hare were two men who murdered people to sell to the anatomists. I can understand why people were afraid of the concept, but I also got tired of being reminded of that. The book moves fairly quickly, however, so it's easy to skim over these repetitive passages, and get to the meat of the mystery.
  23. Book Number:5 Number Of Pages:282 Book Title:Mist Over Pendle Author:Robert Neill Summary:Set in early 17th century England, this novel tells the story of a young orphaned woman named Margery Whitaker, who is sent to live with an older relative, Roger Nowell. Nowell is a true historical figure, who happens to be a Justice of the Peace in Pendle, a town in Lancashire. Margery finds herself caught up in the events leading to the famous Lancaster witch trials of 1612. Rating: (optional)Excellent Review: (optional)This is one of my favourite books, and I've read it many times. I highly recommend it to anyone who likes historical novels. The story is told from the POV of someone involved in the investigation leading up to the witchcraft trials, and not from the POV of the witches themselves, so we get only that one perspective. People in those days mostly believed in witchcraft, however, especially the witches themselves. The story gives us more than just the witches, however. There are many lovely passages about early 17th century customs and fashions, a couple of nice little romances, and many discussions of ethics when it comes to investigating crimes. Also, Margery is a fascinating heroine -- intelligent, brave and compassionate.
  24. I just made my fourth unsuccessful attempt to summon a GoN. Haven't given up hope yet.