An exchange

So, run away all those of you who think feminism is silly, don’t like PC language and think there is no problem out there anyway. That will be most/all of you.

Here we have the usual story of me pointing out that calling people bitches, actually referring to a bitch slap, whatever that may be, and harlots, is insulting and derogatory to women.

People, if you are still reading, do you want your partner (of whatever gender) to be called a bitch, a slut, a prostitute or a whore? I forgot harlot. My cousin named her daughter Charlotte and my dad’s first comment was ‘bad choice of name for rhyming’.

It is not generally regarded as a compliment to call a woman or a man, any of these names. Is that clear or not?

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to consider that using those terms continues to perpetuate derogatory language, views and stereotypes against a) women and b) sex workers/prostitutes/harlots/slags/sluts etc.

Here is the convo.

[Me] I thought it was interesting that you had two back to back posts using sexist language. ie bitch and harlot.

>rough, my use of ‘sexist’ language as you call it was unintentional. I am not a PC person, I simply use the English language as available. I assure you I can be just as capable of referring to males in the same derogatory light.

[Me]Everyone’s use of sexist language is ‘always’ unintentional. And therein lies the problem.

Because when someone (me) points it out, that is the standard response. Hey ho, I could write a blog post about it if I hadn’t already written 20 before

I am not a PC person either, all my computers are apple.

>rough, as an older linguist, I don’t see a problem with sexist language. I am not in favour of feminism, but I do support equality. The PC I referred to first was as in politically correct.[in reference to my clearly unwitty comment about PCs and Apples] I see we will continue to differ on this issue.


1) I really like being patronised and being told that PC stands for politically correct.

2) Unintentional is just not good enough. Simple as that. ‘I didn’t mean to offend you but this is what I think and this is what I say so suck that,’ is basically what it means.

3) What is an older linguist? Someone older than me by a few years? Someone who has a linguistics degree or is fluent in lots of languages? Or someone who just wants to say, I’m older, I’m more educated, I know better than you? Really? I don’t think so sweetheart.

4) However, would you say to a woman in the street, ‘Hiya black bitch, how’s it going?’ or how about, ‘Hey your partner is a cracking harlot’? I could add more examples but you get the idea.

5) And the problem with sexist language is that it demeans women.

The biggest non-sequitur.

~ I am not in favour of feminism but I do support equality ~

*Bangs head on Apple (not PC)*

The two are not the same. They should be the same but they aren’t.

Why aren’t they the same? Because equality isn’t just about equal wages and the right to get a job and equal legal rights. Equality, per se feminism, is about challenging ingrained discrimination against women because they aren’t up to it. They are not equal to men.

We can have all the laws under the sun to say we are all equal, but that doesn’t take away from our inherent and inbred discrimination against whoever. Insert, women, disabled people, people who are mentally ill, LGBTQ, black people, Asians, basically anyone who isn’t a white male heterosexual with a decent bank account.

It’s called privilege. Yes, it’s probably what most of you would call PC again. But if you are born, white, male and rich, you are off and running with your inbuilt privilege.

Many years ago, I met up with the friend with whom I had travelled around the world. She bemoaned the local council who seemed to be favouring black disabled lesbians. Would I want to be one? Would I hell. It’s bad enough being white and hetero and allegedly of a sound body.

The world is built around white men. Sad as it may seem to those men who think their rights in life are being eroded, they aren’t. They will never be. Why abuse women, and use sexually charged language?

People who don’t acknowledge the power of language have their heads in the sand. Or maybe they enjoy using abusive language.

Calling a girl a technology harlot for using a mobile ‘phone? I don’t think that was necessary.

About roughseasinthemed

I write about my life as an English person living in Spain and Gibraltar, on Roughseas, subjects range from politics and current developments in Gib to book reviews, cooking and getting on with life. My views and thoughts on a variety of topics - depending on my mood of the day - can be found over on Clouds. A few pix are over on Everypic - although it is not a photoblog. And of course my dog had his own blog, but most of you knew that anyway. Pippadogblog etc
This entry was posted in blogging, computers, consumerism, feminism, gender-specific language, internet, life, musings, thoughts and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to An exchange

  1. pinkagendist says:

    Not sure about harlot. Is it used as an insult? I think it’s rather romantically depressing. Makes me think of Hogarth.
    After your last tirade on not using sexual language to demean, I spent months trying to come up with something sexually neutral. I’ve decided to go with Colonic Irrigation Tube. Now if I’m terribly angry at someone I’ll say “you’re such a CIT”


    • Oh come on, you know perfectly well that it is being used as an insulting term.

      [deletes long reason why]

      You may find it romanticly depressing. I still see it by and large as insulting. That aside, I quite like Hogarth.

      Tirade? Me?

      What’s wrong with fuckwit anyway? Beautifully gender neutral. As is arsehole. I’ll admit tosser and dickhead are discriminatory. But they aren’t as loaded and don’t carry the same derision as some of the feminine words. Wanker is probably GN too.

      People probably think you are mispronouncing ‘git’ instead of telling them they are full of shit 😀

      Must check my baked beans. I am sure they are low in cholesterol. Esp with ginger and chillies. Try them.


  2. Just looks like you picked a moron to talk to. One can be a misogynist and still have good vocabulary. 🙂


    • Which moron did you mean? You, Pink, the one in the quoted exchange or my former friend from world travels? 🙂

      I didn’t say anyone was a misogynist, rather that the use of language was sexist. And as you have by implication pointed out, not grammatically accurate.

      I had to look up bitch slap [the original phrase in the text that offended me] as it’s not something my small circle of acquaintances uses. Not only is bitch sexist, bitch slap is very sexist. Apart from that, I do dislike such sloppy terms that are bandied around these days.

      It’s rather like swearing. (I believe y’all call it cursing/cussing). It lacks imagination to find the precise word/s to fit.

      Having looked at your blog, I doubt we have much in common. 😀 But still, thanks for the comment and visit 🙂

      Q. Can one be a misogynist/sexist and have good vocabulary and understand the offensive use of language and why it offends? Homework for today.


  3. Never liked the term “bitch slapped” or a lot of other language that is derogatory to one group or another. Not overly sensitive, but do wish some would “grow up” and get a decent working vocabulary.
    And why should one group be “allowed” to say certain words that are forbidden for another group to say – a negative word is a negative word no matter who is using it.
    Know something funny – an elderly grandmother used to say “It doesn’t matter if you said it out loud – thinking it is just as bad.” She’s right – but it may take some time for the thinking to change.


    • Bitch slapped seems to hit a few ways, so to speak. The use of the word bitch in the first place and then the implication of being gay and/or lack of masculinity. It’s just derogatory all round, and this is my first (hopefully last) encounter with the word.

      Well this person is clearly grown up, and older than me, and teaches English as I recall. Dread to think what his pupils learn.

      Ah yes, the group thing. It’s ok for me to use certain words because when I use it, it isn’t an insult, but if you use it, it is. It’s like the so-called reclamation of words, which I think is fatuous. The vast majority of people haven’t a clue about that so it is a wasted statement.

      I think it’s fair to say that I am ‘sensitive’ or rather, I object to the use of some words, but it isn’t just objection for the sake of it, it’s because I believe language and words are very influential (why else would we have advertising? political campaigns?) and a bit like the giraffe sometimes I think it is time to say something. What do I lose? Someone who neither follows nor comments on my blogs 😀

      A wise quote from grandma. It never will change totally, but if only a few people think differently it’s a start. So all I can do, is say, don’t use disrespectful language. Or read the dictionary every day. I started to learn a new word a day at one point. The only one I can still remember is apricate.


      • Words matter. (not a wasted statement – giggles inserted)
        It take time to change thought, but that’s what has to happen. Meanwhile a little consideration and avoidance of mean/hurtful/disrespectful language would be a start.


        • Words are more important than we think.

          The problem is that many people are fixated on the concept of ‘PC language’ and don’t understand there is genuine thinking and feeling behind it. If someone tells me they find words offensive, whether nigger, or coon, or spastic, or whatever, then I won’t use those words. Hardly difficult.


          • I’ve noticed that lately people have been about “taking back” terms that were once used to insult them. More women are writing blogs with names such as “Bookslut” and “Slutever,” and laughing in the faces of men who try to use those terms against them. Another example is the queer movement. Calling a gay person queer was once insulting, but now they are calling themselves queer and they have a whole, huge intellectual movement backing them up.
            I agree with you in that I don’t think people realize just how deeply the meaning of a word affects us. We trust out rational brain to give us the “true” meaning but it’s never as simple as that. When someone calls a woman a “harlot” as a joke our rational brains might realize that it’s a joke and laugh, but our instinct will also kick in and change the way we see that woman and chances are that we would respect her less than we would have otherwise.
            Language is complicated and powerful, and it really does matter how we use it, even when we are joking.

            Thank for that post…it really got my mind racing.


          • I used to be on a few radical feminist forums and the issue of reclamation of language often came up. As with most feminist opinions, there were plenty of them.

            I think while gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual and queer are used to define sexuality (although why should anyone have to do that?) they can also be used in insulting terms. As with just about any descriptive word for someone.

            Part of the problem with ‘queer’ is that some of the LGBT community use it ie LGBTQ and others don’t. It’s not my community so I include it because I don’t know enough about it, and the people I was mixing with years ago preferred that. Things change.

            I think that’s different however to calling someone a bitch, a slut, a harlot, a whore, a slag. There is no way you can argue that those terms are not intended as insults.

            As for ‘Bookslut’ and ‘Slutforever’ I mean “Slutever’, neither or which I have seen, I think a) they don’t know what they are talking about and b) they are looking for publicity. Take those in whichever order you choose.

            After thirty years and journalism and PR, I know words matter which is why I sometimes write about them, and ask people to consider what they are saying.


  4. Interesting you picked that term–the first part of the compound word. OH and I, over many years, know where certain limits exist. That particular word happens to be one of the very few that cannot be used, regardless. Up to now I had not given it much though and had instead left it as something that would likely remain that way. Upon a little reflection I have decided it needs to stay in that place. The implications and self-contained inferences about attitudes toward others are things I could do without.


    • That’s an interesting comment. There are no two ways about it. It is always meant as an insult, and it is derisive and insulting to women because of that. I don’t see how hard that is to understand. In addition, after educating myself by looking up the compound word, I think it is pretty insulting to men/gays/whoever in terms of suggesting they are not sufficiently masculine. Which again, goes into the men are superior to women loop.

      Perhaps we should all go back to using proper and sensible English instead of the current garbage slang that is bandied about.

      As an aside I decided to stop following said blog. While I agree with much of what he writes, I really can’t be doing with someone who justifies poor use of language with that old cop out of ‘unintentional’.


  5. I admit that I have used these words. Both Kim and you have chastised me for it! I regret it – I agree that I shouldn’t have.

    I blame Hollywood and in particular the use of the term ‘Son of a Bitch’ which when you think about it is paradoxically very sexist – no one ever says ‘Daughter of a Bitch’! They also say ‘You dirty dog’ but only to a man and I suggest that both of these terms and others like them such pervert, scumbag and creep which are generally reserved for men are insults against what you would describe as white privileged males.

    Not trying to be controversial just to provide some equilibrium and wider perspective!

    “Light the blue touch-paper and walk away’ – Standard Fireworks!


    • Oh dear. It’s raining. No golf and you are bored.

      Here goes to light up the sky with Standard Fireworks, although more like jumping crackers.

      As I remember Kim and her pals also prefer to be ladies not women. Same principle but different strand so I’ll leave that one alone for now.

      I don’t think it has anything to do with Hollywood at all.

      Bitch, literally meaning a female dog, is a common slang term in the English language, especially used as a denigrating term applied to a person, commonly a woman. It often refers to someone who is belligerent, unreasonable, malicious, rudely intrusive, and/or aggressive.
      Its original use as a vulgarism, documented to the fourteenth century, suggested high sexual desire in a woman, comparable to a dog in heat. The range of meanings has expanded in modern usage. In a feminist context, it can indicate a strong or assertive woman, one who might make men feel threatened. When applied to a man, bitch is a derogatory term for a subordinate.

      I think you are out by a few years. Brush up on your history …

      Next. Dogs seem to be up there in a number of abusable terms. Which I think is extremely offensive to dogs, but I would think that wouldn’t I?

      Calling people a dog to denote they are ugly. Back when I was called a dog it was almost exclusively a term directed at women. Four men bearing down on you and all shouting ‘DOG!’ is not a nice experience, I tell you.

      Urban dictionary has pages of dog definitions.

      Here are some wiki ones;:

      • (derogatory) A dull, unattractive girl or woman. – She’s a real dog.
      • (slang) A man. – You lucky dog!   He’s a sly dog.
      • (slang, derogatory) A coward. – Come back and fight, you dogs!
      • (derogatory) Someone who is morally reprehensible. – You dirty dog.

      Note the only gender specific use that is derogatory is directed at women.

      Moving on.


      Originating in the 1660s a pervert was originally defined as “one who has forsaken a doctrine or system regarded as true, apostate.” The sense of a pervert as a sexual term was derived in 1896, and applied originally to variants of sexualities or sexual behavior rejected by the individual who used the term.


      The verb pervert is less narrow in reference than the related nouns, and may be used with no sexual connotations. It is used in English law for the crime of perverting the course of justice which is a common law offence


      You can use Google as well as I can, probably better.

      Scumbag is defined by urban dictionary as:

      • A person of poor judgement and no class.

      • A used condom.

      I’d always understood it to be the first definition.There are pages of that one too, but they seem to be pretty much of a muchness.

      You could argue that calling someone a scumbag (by the second definition) is derogatory to men. You could also extrapolate to say that it insults women too, as by inference, she can also become a scumbag (as can a homosexual man of course). I’d still be going with the first definition.


      on the other hand, is normally a specific reference to men who are hitting on woman who aren’t interested in them. Although I do recall calling people at school creeps for creeping up to teachers.

      Now, I don’t think you are getting this.

      There is a difference between words that are specifically female in origin, and sexual, eg bitch, harlot, and to go into four letter words, c**t and t**t.

      The other examples you chose are not derived from a description of men. Neither dog, pervert, scumbag or creep fit the same criteria. You could probably argue that the use of ‘dog’ to describe a woman means she is so ugly she doesn’t even look like a bitch. Whatever.

      Gender specific terms that would be insulting to men would be dickhead, or just dick, and – I can’t think of any more. Oh Tosser, I think that’s pretty male orientated. But neither of those words carry the same venom.

      Don’t conflate male white privilege with gender specific language/insults. The second can be used against anyone regardless of gender, skin colour or money, eg scumbag.

      The issue of white male privilege is separate. But the connection is that they are often the ones using the sexist insults and perpetuating them to the extent that people (ie women of all colours and non-white men) also use them.

      That was heavy wasn’t it? MA in gender specific language coming up next. I wonder if the OU does one? And if I can fit it in between dog walks and board papers?


      • PS, they don’t need to say daughter of a bitch, they just say bitch. Either way the insult against the woman comes into it.


      • Ha Ha. Brilliant!
        Best of 3 falls of a knock out.
        Knock out in the first round!

        Good use of Wiki by-the-way!

        I concede on almost every point but stick by my Hollywood accusation however. I think my first recollection of the phrase was in the Godfather when Sonny got wild after Paulie beat up his sister. “That Sonoffabitch” he snarled and after that it was in most films that I ever remember (deliberate exaggeration of course).

        Raining, yes you said it, clear now for a while but white supremacist, male dominated, rich man golf course still closed here in Grimsby (joke (weak)).


        • Really? Do you think my reply to yours would get me Freshly Pressed? 😀

          Hey, it was a quick response or would have been had I not been informed it was TIME TO GO OUT by one of those d.o.g. words. So wiki and urb dic it had to be. It was good enough for the purpose of the reply.

          Hmm are you sure? And did you look up wiki on bitch? Or bitch on wiki to be more accurate.

          Son of a bitch
          The term son of a bitch is a form of profanity usually used to refer to a man who is nasty, rude or otherwise offensive. In Shakespeare’s King Lear (1603), the Earl of Kent refers to Oswald as “…nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pandar, and the son and heir of a mongrel bitch…”

          Shakespeare seems to have beaten Coppola by a few years.

          What you need is a dog. You can take them out in all weathers 🙂 Laughing myself silly at the thought of you wandering around Grimsby with a patient little four leg monster who doesn’t understand why you are frightened of it.

          Anyway, if you have stopped using bitch that is a start. Next I have to get you to call ladies women. That will be difficult I suspect.

          [I knew there was a reason why golf never appealed to me]


          • Somehow these don’t sound right to me –

            “Calendar Women”?
            “Woman in Red”?
            “Woman and the Tramp”?
            “Woman with the Lamp”?
            “Woman Gaga”?
            “First Woman”?
            “Woman Margaret Thatcher”?
            “Womanbird books”?
            “Church of our Woman”?
            “Woman Bird Johnson”?
            “Woman Chatterley’s Lover”?
            “Woman of the Lake”?
            “Woman Penelope”? (Thunderbirds)
            “Woman Eleanor”? (Lindisfarne)
            “Woman Shave”? ( Remington)


          • Very unfunny.

            You are confusing Lady as in a title with lady as in a desire by women (and men) for women to be socially aspirational.

            No idea about Gaga as never heard anything by him her it.

            The four before that sound fine to me.

            As does first woman.

            Thatcher was a baroness, so as far as I know was entitled to be called Lady MT much to your dislike no doubt 😀

            Ladybird describes a beetle not a woman.

            Ladybird J was also a name as far as I know.

            Lady Chatt as above with MT.

            Woman of the Lake? the only reason for it not working is alliteration.

            Lady Penelope as with MT and LChatt.

            Lady Eleanor, ‘in walked Roderick Usher with the Lady Eleanor’? I think that suggests she is aristocracy especially when linked with the fall of the House of Usher.

            Woman shave? nothing wrong with that, except why should women shave anyway?


            Oh and ..


          • Double brilliant – I am chortling here!

            “Ladies in Love” D H Lawrence – oh shit! I never liked Lawrence anyway!

            Women shave for the same reason as men don’t they – vanity?

            I forgot “Women Rose” by Mungo Jerry!


          • Thank you 🙂

            Except it is not meant to be funny as I said before. And which of my corrections are you prepared to argue with?

            I liked Lawrence, not read him for years. Ladies in love don’t work 😀

            Men *normally usually* shave their chins. But they aren’t obliged to shave their legs and armpits and pubic hairs because they are all offensive. Women have to conform to societal expectation of what they should look like. [inserts yawn at this stage]

            I’d forgotten Lady Rose too. Sounds a bit like T Rex, all I could remember was Yellow River.

            What about Lady Jane (Stones) and For my Lady (Moody Blues)?

            and you can’t miss out

            This one could run on too long!


          • If you write a provocative post then I assume you anticipate a response (not very often, I agree) that generates a debate? I may not always agree entirely with what I say but I do like to stir the pot! :o)


          • Me? provocative posts? I think you are confusing me with someone else.

            Ah! So you admit to trolling then? 😀


          • Provocative – why yes – you are inviting a response aren’t you? That is what what makes you an interesting blogger. Surely you don’t want everyone to agree with you? Do you?

            Negative trolling no – Positive interaction yes. I always appreciate your point of view and I hope that you tolerate mine as well.

            The difference between us is probably quite slim just a matter of different ends of the telescope and how we react to an alternative point of view?


          • No, I am being polite and replying 🙂 Like to be courteous and acknowledge responses on mine, and that’s a serious point as well as slightly tongue in cheek. Mostly serious.

            You raise an interesting point there about agreement, and something I mean to blog about generally. Because reading like-minded blogs can get soooooo tedious. What is there to say? Great post? 😉 But there again, reading opposite-minded blogs is just a waste of time. I need a happy medium.

            I don’t care whether people agree or not, I just prefer interesting comments. And I am happy to reply/discuss. Your lady list was an interesting and clever reply.

            The trolling was a joke, you knew I didn’t mean it.

            Different points of view are just that aren’t they? I think an exchange of views is interesting, and as Pink (above) has said before now, it’s one good reason for blogging, to learn from each other, whatever the topic.

            I would say the difference is huge! but who cares? 😀


          • I stop now and wait for your next post.


          • Where are yours? So to speak. Got a couple half written, but not right, so waiting for a little muse to come along to inspire me.


  6. Kev says:

    I’ve never liked derogatory language. Bitch-Slapped, I thought that was an American term…never liked it. Harlot…you’ve lost me on that one. I thought it was an old, old word used like in ancient times. I can’t say I’ve heard anyone use it. It’s still derogatory however and not the kind of word I would choose to describe someone.


    • I think derogatory language and swearing are different, so I would say no to derogatory language unless used in the original sense, eg bitch for a female dog. When the two are conflated, ie calling someone a coño to insult them I find offensive. But if you are specifically talking about a woman’s vagina, then it isn’t. The extrapolation there is that using a very sexual part of a woman’s body to insult someone, is degrading her body, her sexuality, the essence of a woman. Now, if you said coño, meaning hey, great person! that would be totally different. But that doesn’t happen.

      I’m sure bitch-slapped must be American given that I’d never heard it before 😀 Either way, it’s loaded with insults. There are two perfectly usable words that come to mind, slapped on its own is one and the other is hit. The English language has plenty of options without descending to the use of pejorative insulting unimaginative slang words.


      • Kev says:

        You’re absolutely right on all counts and there is no way in hell I’m going to argue with a woman’s essence. It should be worshiped not torn down.

        I agree with you on bitch-slapped being loaded. It comes across not only as violent, but with the connotations of all manners of abuses and violations. Of all the derogatory statements I’ve heard. This one tops it for me. It make me cringe.


        • I think to use sexual terms as insults is just crude. (note to self, do not use dickhead and tosser …)

          As I said, I’d not heard it before. But why justify using such a word? When I pointed it out, instead of being defensive, he could have thought about it, and said, ‘I didn’t realise that,’ but no.


          • Kev says:

            btw I forgot to mention about Pink…religious people are just f*****g ignorant. They need to get with the times instead of living in the goddamn dark ages while trying to drag everyone down with them.

            I try to be respectful of others beliefs but when they put themselves on a pedestal and point down at others, it pisses me off big time. They can be so shallow and weak-minded.

            You criticise other blogs?…no! Surely, you jest. 😉


          • That’s a bit heavy for you!! I was just busy writing a polite reply to one of same f****g idiots actually on his blog, asking why homosexuality and sex before after or outside marriage contributes to America’s high crime rate. Apparently it does. Hey, I have sex and I’m not married so that makes me go off on a life of crime? That is some seriously screwed up thinking. Want the link? 😀

            There are some wickedly funny atheist blogs out there, but I really need to stop wasting my time on all of that. It’s just that when the atheists drop by the religious bigots, they are funny. Oh what the hell, if you are really bored, google askthebigot, if you haven’t already found it from Pink’s. Just don’t comment and feed her ego even further. She doesn’t like me 😀

            I criticise badly written ones that are freshly pressed. Have you not read those posts yet? 😀 I don’t criticise my mates’ blogs, I do have some morals. Even if I don’t like their themes.


          • Kev says:

            Like I mention in my last response on scary tale…people really don’t want to get on that side of me. 😉 It’s rare, but it happens once in a blue moon. 🙂

            You have me confused with this married thing. I thought you had mentioned about getting married in a post I read a while back? Not that it makes any difference to me. But are you or are you not?

            Hell you can’t take notice of all that babble…we’d either be permanent virgins, condemned to the darkest pits of hell or a bloody castrati if we tried making them happy.

            I’ll be checking up more on Pinks stuff. I’m sure I’ll find her whether I want to or not. lol

            I like Patty’s badge…she’s modified WP freshly pressed badge so it says, I’m Not Freshly Pressed and has it on her page. lol


          • Everyone has that side to them. Most people think partner is really nice and smiley until his face changes.

            Me, I’m just shitty all the time so that’s easy 😀

            Sorry, I was talking generally there rather than about me specifically. Yes I am but I choose not to publicise it as I think it is no one else’s business. Hence no ring, no change of name, retained birth name etc. It’s between me, him and the tax office.

            I think they have serious sexual issue, not joking there. Doesn’t matter whether it is about pre-marital sex or homosexual sex, or well, just any sex. There is something skewed in the psyche that says you can’t enjoy a loving relationship that may or may not involve sex.

            Despite the fact that Pink has mentioned me in a couple of his recent posts, we have never met, so I don’t know him. Bigot seemed to think I was part of his cabal which did not go down well with me.

            I’ve seen one of those before – it’s been recommended to me 😀


          • Kev says:

            Pat and I got married in the registrar too. Neither of us were that fussy. It was an happy occasion and we did it for us not anyone else… that’s the way it should be.

            There are people in both our families that don’t want us together…we didn’t even tell them when we got married, but news travels through the grapevine.

            Why can’t people just let other people be? What do people always think, they know best and all that shit? It audacious if you ask me.

            Pat wanted a small party, so we had a little do with a select few people…personally I would have been happy with just the two of us and a witness…done.

            So yeah, damn right…it’s completely your business. Screw what anyone else thinks. You married each other, not the rest of the bloody world. The main thing is you’re both happy with each other and that’s all that counts. 😀


  7. Pingback: Impact v intent v2 | Clouds moving in

  8. Pingback: Intent v impact? | Clouds moving in

I appreciate any comments you leave, so long as they are relatively polite. And thanks for reading.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s