My apologies for blowing a few vibes. I can do an edit and move on if you wish.
Queens of the stoned age
-
spidergawd
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Sun 11th May 2008 09:21 pm
- Location: The Mars Hotel
Re: Queens of the stoned age
I strongly object to women, anyone under any circumstances being referred to as W P of S, and he has no idea of what he talks, after all he rejects any studies/analysis whether unpredudiced or not. I did think that I might answer in a more restrained way, with explanations of my personal experience, but then I chose to let it hang out in the idiom of the post to which I was replying.
My apologies for blowing a few vibes. I can do an edit and move on if you wish.
My apologies for blowing a few vibes. I can do an edit and move on if you wish.
What a long strange trip it is.
-
OneHighMofo
- Posts: 1720
- Joined: Wed 25th Feb 2015 06:04 pm
Re: Queens of the stoned age
No no - please sir remain firm. I'm not particularly squeamish about someone speaking their mind. Especially when it's done so eloquentlyspidergawd wrote: ↑Tue 14th Mar 2017 05:09 pm I strongly object to women, anyone under any circumstances being referred to as W P of S, and he has no idea of what he talks, after all he rejects any studies/analysis whether unpredudiced or not. I did think that I might answer in a more restrained way, with explanations of my personal experience, but then I chose to let it hang out in the idiom of the post to which I was replying.
My apologies for blowing a few vibes. I can do an edit and move on if you wish.
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Your good Spidey, Jess I,m afraid sat through a lot of church of England sermons in his youth.
More time in a pool hall would of helped.
As for this fairy tail,you go to jail in NY. ask Martain Sheens other son
More time in a pool hall would of helped.
As for this fairy tail,you go to jail in NY. ask Martain Sheens other son
-
spidergawd
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Sun 11th May 2008 09:21 pm
- Location: The Mars Hotel
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Well guys, make love not war. The edit is done. 
What a long strange trip it is.
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Fifty rears later and a Hippie is still a Hippie
See you soon Mate
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Slaps a "can't well just get a bong?" Sticker on thread and runs.
-
free_phil_spector
- Posts: 445
- Joined: Mon 4th Jun 2012 09:50 pm
Re: Queens of the stoned age
I wish you hadn't. Sounds like a humdinger of a post I missed
I missed that too! Gotta link? 
It's so easy to laugh, it's so easy to hate - it takes guts to be gentle and kind...
-
spidergawd
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Sun 11th May 2008 09:21 pm
- Location: The Mars Hotel
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Roll another one, just like the other one.
Crikey!free_phil_spector wrote: ↑Tue 14th Mar 2017 06:54 pmI wish you hadn't. Sounds like a humdinger of a post I missed
OK time to move on, nothing to see here.
What a long strange trip it is.
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Thanks for restoring harmony all. Gives a warm glow to this hippy when the Forum self heals.
Re: Queens of the stoned age
@Spidergawd
Firstly, for the record: thanks for your quotation but please take a look again, especially at 'regulary' and 'lets say unconscious conditioning'. Done? If so, you realised something? Again: I'm about regulary consumption during pregnancy, more precise e.g. daily. Not talking about occasional consumpiton of say a couple of times during pregnancy ; like so many things it's all about frequency.
I wonder why you reacted that way. Suddenly you bring 'moderate cannabis use by a pregnant woman' and 'bit of weed in a cake aint much' to the table but you obviously missed the topic or you (un-?)consciously downplaying it to 'moderate consumption' probably because of your personal experiencies with your wife or you just don't know better as a biased consumer yourself seeing things related with this drug through rose-coloured glasses instead of balancing
pros and cons(You wouldn't even say this drug can be addictive, wouldn't you?).
Back to conditioning(again: due to regulary consumption): not saying the baby is looking for hashish immediately after birth but there is a disposition then(cannabinoids enter bloodstream of the fetus). Period.
Personally I'm convinced unborn life should be protected against all things which can be prevented(am aware there is no 100% protection but this one here is preventable).
So if this mother can't stop consuming or even worse selfishly thinks it's no problem at all then what does this selfishness says about that character? Sure there are mothers not even reflect it the slightest(including fathers aware of consumption but not caring for what ever reason)but this isn't an option, too.
I suggest you take your list of 'high achieving children of cannabis mums' to your local group of excercising pregnant women for a little discussion about that.
What do you think your inner voice would tell you? That sort of reality check should be enough to realise it's just something to avoid.
If you use common sense then this is a no brainer(or maybe until a reputable seedbank comes up with a strain designed for pregnant women as it seems there are so many strains for every aspect of life nowadays).
By the way you think your personal experience then is representative? Or this list of other parents? Bet you never thought about at least conditioning yet.
Please don't try to downplay this with like knockout arguments like you can't have it all or stuff.
Yes, I remember Thalidomide but like I was trying to say above with don't compare this drug with other drugs it's the same with this.
Such 'arguments' look reasonable(/optimistic respectively positive) at first but in fact are phoney excuses.
It's like saying a sick homeless shouldn't feel that desperated because some people in a so called third world country suffer more and he should be positive.
Which only is positive in an obscure way as in theory he is at a better place but more importantly both still suffer in the end and this metaphor isn‘t changing that at all while one is even encouraged to think one(homeless) is better than an other one(third world country) ; at best it's an excuse to keep up the status quo and not trying to change it. Same with Thalidomide: that thing causes more problems when applied during pregnancy than weed on the regular. Still there is harm caused by weed as shown above.
This harm by weed doesn't suddenly disappear only because the other one is causing more harm. Still such advices are maybe meant as a mantra and if doing so problems disappear eventually after repeated a million times. Or washing it away like 'We agree to disagree'(in this case here wrong approach) ; have done my homework(still doing even) about that plant and know like with everything it cuts both ways. We're talking about unborn children, get real.
Parentage is about responsibility not selfishness.
Secondly, you can say I didn't choose my words carefully but I was aware of that since a simple 'bad behaviour' wouldn't do much so sometimes it's necessary to point things out more emphatically ; above all this is an adult forum and people should be able to abstract what I'm about.
(Additional note: will never take back what I wrote about that woman and the same goes for men if they‘d be able to get pregnant like a seahorse by the way and the same for your wife if she consumed like that )
I do see your harmony approach and you can always say there are reasons for her acting like that(childhood, circumstances, traumas)and nobody is perfect so you can't judge a human being at all in the end and this is to some point true but you just have to name and shame misbehaviour - especially regarding such a delicate topic - as showing alternatives at one point ; mistakes rarely solve themselves but if discussed can be changed. Means: no harmony at all costs. From there you can move to other solutions.
I wonder why you edited your original post. Is it because you're frightened by yourself reading what you have written there(what ever it was by the way I missed it and even if I had I'd stick to your misreading I pointed out above)?
Then that usual 420 clique(a topic in itsself ) mostly jumps in and backs you up without spinelessly giving their own opinion about regular consumption during pregnancy( I see there is a social touch with this but mostly it's spineless ; on the other hand most seem to got me right and know about that pregnant dealer being selfish and irresponsible then ) – is this either out of sympathy or base motives?
After that you decide to edit your post and this is just poor as personally I come from an age where you excused yourself for something you have done or said. In opposite to that you edit that stuff thinking this is noble and a pacific gesture and you even get celebrated for this but in fact it is just poor spinelessness.
Just because there's some negativity involved doesn't mean much, that's life; furthermore after editing you can't understand this thread looking back. Though this naive editing is quite common on the internet these days it seem. Just excuse yourself for it instead of editing that's enough, really(saying you doing so by editing isn't the same ; if you can't stand you've done a somewhat mistake then...oh my!). This is the adult way of doing so in my humble opinion ; if not you're still a child.
@Lemming
Take note ; since involved now after I put this straight this chapter is closed.
Firstly, for the record: thanks for your quotation but please take a look again, especially at 'regulary' and 'lets say unconscious conditioning'. Done? If so, you realised something? Again: I'm about regulary consumption during pregnancy, more precise e.g. daily. Not talking about occasional consumpiton of say a couple of times during pregnancy ; like so many things it's all about frequency.
I wonder why you reacted that way. Suddenly you bring 'moderate cannabis use by a pregnant woman' and 'bit of weed in a cake aint much' to the table but you obviously missed the topic or you (un-?)consciously downplaying it to 'moderate consumption' probably because of your personal experiencies with your wife or you just don't know better as a biased consumer yourself seeing things related with this drug through rose-coloured glasses instead of balancing
pros and cons(You wouldn't even say this drug can be addictive, wouldn't you?).
Back to conditioning(again: due to regulary consumption): not saying the baby is looking for hashish immediately after birth but there is a disposition then(cannabinoids enter bloodstream of the fetus). Period.
Personally I'm convinced unborn life should be protected against all things which can be prevented(am aware there is no 100% protection but this one here is preventable).
So if this mother can't stop consuming or even worse selfishly thinks it's no problem at all then what does this selfishness says about that character? Sure there are mothers not even reflect it the slightest(including fathers aware of consumption but not caring for what ever reason)but this isn't an option, too.
I suggest you take your list of 'high achieving children of cannabis mums' to your local group of excercising pregnant women for a little discussion about that.
What do you think your inner voice would tell you? That sort of reality check should be enough to realise it's just something to avoid.
If you use common sense then this is a no brainer(or maybe until a reputable seedbank comes up with a strain designed for pregnant women as it seems there are so many strains for every aspect of life nowadays).
By the way you think your personal experience then is representative? Or this list of other parents? Bet you never thought about at least conditioning yet.
Please don't try to downplay this with like knockout arguments like you can't have it all or stuff.
Yes, I remember Thalidomide but like I was trying to say above with don't compare this drug with other drugs it's the same with this.
Such 'arguments' look reasonable(/optimistic respectively positive) at first but in fact are phoney excuses.
It's like saying a sick homeless shouldn't feel that desperated because some people in a so called third world country suffer more and he should be positive.
Which only is positive in an obscure way as in theory he is at a better place but more importantly both still suffer in the end and this metaphor isn‘t changing that at all while one is even encouraged to think one(homeless) is better than an other one(third world country) ; at best it's an excuse to keep up the status quo and not trying to change it. Same with Thalidomide: that thing causes more problems when applied during pregnancy than weed on the regular. Still there is harm caused by weed as shown above.
This harm by weed doesn't suddenly disappear only because the other one is causing more harm. Still such advices are maybe meant as a mantra and if doing so problems disappear eventually after repeated a million times. Or washing it away like 'We agree to disagree'(in this case here wrong approach) ; have done my homework(still doing even) about that plant and know like with everything it cuts both ways. We're talking about unborn children, get real.
Parentage is about responsibility not selfishness.
Secondly, you can say I didn't choose my words carefully but I was aware of that since a simple 'bad behaviour' wouldn't do much so sometimes it's necessary to point things out more emphatically ; above all this is an adult forum and people should be able to abstract what I'm about.
(Additional note: will never take back what I wrote about that woman and the same goes for men if they‘d be able to get pregnant like a seahorse by the way and the same for your wife if she consumed like that )
I do see your harmony approach and you can always say there are reasons for her acting like that(childhood, circumstances, traumas)and nobody is perfect so you can't judge a human being at all in the end and this is to some point true but you just have to name and shame misbehaviour - especially regarding such a delicate topic - as showing alternatives at one point ; mistakes rarely solve themselves but if discussed can be changed. Means: no harmony at all costs. From there you can move to other solutions.
I wonder why you edited your original post. Is it because you're frightened by yourself reading what you have written there(what ever it was by the way I missed it and even if I had I'd stick to your misreading I pointed out above)?
Then that usual 420 clique(a topic in itsself ) mostly jumps in and backs you up without spinelessly giving their own opinion about regular consumption during pregnancy( I see there is a social touch with this but mostly it's spineless ; on the other hand most seem to got me right and know about that pregnant dealer being selfish and irresponsible then ) – is this either out of sympathy or base motives?
After that you decide to edit your post and this is just poor as personally I come from an age where you excused yourself for something you have done or said. In opposite to that you edit that stuff thinking this is noble and a pacific gesture and you even get celebrated for this but in fact it is just poor spinelessness.
Just because there's some negativity involved doesn't mean much, that's life; furthermore after editing you can't understand this thread looking back. Though this naive editing is quite common on the internet these days it seem. Just excuse yourself for it instead of editing that's enough, really(saying you doing so by editing isn't the same ; if you can't stand you've done a somewhat mistake then...oh my!). This is the adult way of doing so in my humble opinion ; if not you're still a child.
@Lemming
Take note ; since involved now after I put this straight this chapter is closed.
Re: Queens of the stoned age
Jess take a chill pill the story,s fiction