The Irish Times, Feminist Eejits, Pubic Hair and The Patriarchy!

 

When I logged onto my blog – this blog – this morning I noticed that I had four (4) referrers come from The Irish Times – I just checked and it is now up to eight (8).

Anyhoo, while I do read the Irish Times – online – from time to time, I cannot in all honesty say it is my favourite paper – and am being diplomatic. So, I clicked to see what on earth precipitated this attention from Irish Times readers.

It was a couple of comments on an article called “Growing up down there: me and my pubic hair – Why should young women feel ashamed of their perfectly natural ‘lady gardens’?”

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/growing-up-down-there-me-and-my-pubic-hair-1.1785558

Now, I didn’t actually read this article – though apparently from reading the comments it is about the social pressure on women to shave their pubic hair – also – and again – I didn’t actually read this article – nor will I be – it also appears that this might have something to do with – “the patriarchy

Can you see why I might prefer not to give myself a headache reading about this burning issue and just read the comments – growing more and more bemused as I scrolled down – wondering how in the name of God did I end up somehow being linked to an article about the patriarchal pressure exerted on women to shave their pubic hair!

NOT a subject I have EVER written about, commented on, or to blunt given any thought to in my entire life.

Finally I hit the mother lode. Phew! Because the discussion was getting rather strange – granted there are some intelligent and interesting comments on this article – but – having said that – women shaving their pubic hair!!! NOT on my personal top ten list of “burning issues of the day

I digress – back to the hunt for whatever the hell precipitated this blog being connected or linked to this “issue”

It was a comment exchange started by a poster called Linda Kelly – here it is below. The reason I’m addressing this in an article rather than responding to the actual comments themselves on this Irish Times article comment stream is because I have attempted to respond and this is the message I am getting up till now – which is 15.53 pm GMT

“There was a problem processing your request. Please try again in a moment”

That’s been the message for the last two to two and half hours!

The other reason is this, not because I give a flying rats arse what either the self-righteous Linda Kelly says or posts but to illustrate the mindset among Irish feminists and up to a point those who, while expressing their disagreement with feminism are rather under-informed about the true extent of how feminist “theory” has infected public policy thinking in this country – under the radar.

First the sanctimonious Linda Kelly.

Linda Kelly

The Irish Times is attracting a very unsavoury ‘group’ or one person from a Mens Rights group in Ireland who is aggressively attacking anyone who dares to hold a different opinion and regularly trolls articles to leave aggressive and poisonous comments particulary aimed at ‘dangerous’ feminists/people who believe in an equal society. Just saying.

5 hours ago

2 Likes”

Yep – I know, every MRA/MHRA has immediately spotted the contradictions and downright stupidity displayed in this comment – but for the benefit of Ms. Kelly I will point them out – one by one.

I can almost imagine the pursed lips, and sneer on her face as she types the words “Men’s rights Groups” bearing in mind the juxtaposition of that lovely word “unsavoury

Men? RIGHTS?!!!! Cue snotty comment knee jerk reaction.

Almost immediately followed by her contention that these people leave “aggressive and poisonous” comments” at those who “dares to hold a different opinion

Let me translate – anyone who criticises feminism or feminists is “unsavoury” any criticism of feminism or feminists is “aggressive and poisonous” and anyone who is in any way shape or form advocating for Men’s Rights is also by implication “unsavoury

Her little jibes at me personally – “regularly trolls articles to leave aggressive and poisonous comments” now that made me laugh.

First, I have never actually commented on any online article on the Irish TimesNEVER – not once – I comment on articles on my own blog – this blog. I have commented on a few other sites – AVFM ( A Voice for Men) for example, in fact have had a few articles published there.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/

You should check it out Linda – you will positively overdose on “unsavoury” characters – in fact you might even swooooooooooooooooooooon – I would recommend though that you check out the articles of Diana Davison and a lady called Judgybitch – aka Janet Bloomfield – maybe you could advise them as well about “what feminism is really about”?

I know they would be just dying to hear what you have to say – hanging onto your every word I bet!  🙂

Second – do you have me under surveillance Ms. Kelly? Otherwise how on earth could you possibly know what articles I “troll” or for that matter read? Are you privy to my reading habits?

Now, onto Michael Edwards, who replies to Linda Kelly thus.

Michael Edwards

@Linda Kelly

I got jostled by that bull in a china shop myelf Linda. But how do we know that the poster/s is from a Mens Rights Group?”

First, I have no idea who Michael Edwards is – whether he has or hasn’t posted comments on this blog or not – so his contention that he “ got jostled by that bull in a china shop myelf Linda” is bizarre to say the least – perhaps you could elaborate as to the nature of this “jostling” Michael – because I have never heard of you.

The next bit is hilarious – “But how do we know that the poster/s is from a Mens Rights Group?” –well duh! You can either read it on this blog or on Men’s Rights Ireland or you could have just bloody asked.

Of course there’s always the article the Irish Daily Star published about Men’s Rights Ireland WITH a photo of me – or failing that – the radio interview I did on the Marc Coleman Show on Newstalk – and no – not posting links – go do your own bloody research.

Not very good at verifying information are the pair of you? Bit – well – dumb actually.

Linda Kelly

@Michael Edwards

Hi Michael he spouts all of the same ‘information’ as can be found here with the same ‘style’ of language so no matter how many ‘different’ identities he creates, it is a quite obviously a many clown headed circus of a beast.

https://mensrightsarehumanrights.wordpress.com/2014/03/28/launch-of-mens-rights-ireland/

This group ‘loathes feminism’ and is on a valiant mission to destroy such fictional threats as ‘The propagandising of a non-existent “rape culture” in Ireland, and across much of the developed world.’”

I love this comment for its absolute sheer inanity and stupidity – I cannot count the number of times I have said on this blog – I AM FEMALE – not to mention the article in the Irish Daily Star, the interview on the Marc Colman Show and another interview on Highland Radio – all relatively easily available sources to indicate my sex (gender is in my opinion a stupid word) FEMALE.

I suppose in order to test whether I have multiple identities – rather than just listening to the two radio interviews and maybe running some forensic tests – you could just have asked. Or done your bloody homework!

Am only guessing here – but whoever “he” is – this numbnut obviously believes “he” and I are the same person – sigh.

 

So, let me answer your unasked questions – I started this blog under a pseudonym Anja Eriud – a name suggested by Dean Esmay, managing editor of AVFM (A Voice for Men) when they published my first article on that site, up until then I was registered (if that’s the correct way of saying it) as Eriu – now am I going too fast for you pair of geniuses?

My first actual name is Anne, and Dean bless him suggested the Irish version of Anne which is Aine – but is pronounced Anya – he spelt it Anja – and I didn’t have the heart to tell him it was not quite right – sorry Dean – so the first part of my pseudonym became Anja (Anne)

The surname Eriu – d is my username on AVfM with the first letter of my actual surname added to the end “D” for Dempsey.

And all this information regarding my “secret identity” is not only ON this blog – but appears in the article on the Irish Daily Star.

Some sleuths you two eejits are.

Am not even going to address your stupid inane comment on “rape culture” everything I said in the article says it all.

Linda’s next comment is typical feminist hamster think (look it up – maybe S.E Honan will lend you his/her dictionary) ) – she makes a point of mentioning two articles out of the 103 articles I have posted on this blog so far – on the two subjects that feminists hold dear, in order to peddle their toxic agenda – lauding the mantra of “single motherhood” and “rape culture” two topics that allow feminists to get their knickers in a knot and work themselves up into a hysterical rage.

Linda Kellyl

There’s also a lovely section about single mothers or C.U.N.T.S as they are referred to, but wait, don’t anyone get offended. The author goes on to explain that ‘before anyone gets up a head of steam, the title is an ACRONYM it stands for Crazy. Uneducated. Nasty. Tramps. That’s much better, isn’t it?’

1 hour ago

2 Likes”

Michael pops into the “discussion” again with this gem.

“Michael Edwards

@Linda Kelly

Interesting link Linda. I am all for a forum to discuss mens rights but that site is definitely not it.

But that would suggest that our Hydra is a 52 year old woman? Further proof if it be needed that we simply cannot trust online presences.

1 hour ago

1 Like”

I think I’ve already commented on the genius level detective powers of both these numbskulls – though again – thanks for the laugh regarding this “Further proof if it be needed that we simply cannot trust online presences.”

Ok – in light of the topic under discussion in the article these moronic comments appeared on – a very bad thought popped into head – regarding “further proof” a photo of………………………..but then – could I stop laughing long enough to actually do it – would I want to? Don’t be daft.

The irony of the part where this super sleuth says “we simply cannot trust online presences.” Oh you mean like YOURS and the up her own arse Linda’s? THOSE kinds of “online presences” tell me something ye pair of gobshoites – are there any photos of YOU in a national paper?

“S.E Honan

@Linda Kelly

Well done for looking behind that.

1 hour ago

2 Likes”

 

Yeah S.E Honan – I agree – I’m recommending these two eejits are called in to help find Shergar! Then the Loch Ness Monster, then……………………………….

“John Tangney

@Linda Kelly

I take it you’re referring in part to me. I have nothing to do with ‘Thomas Delaney’ or with any men’s rights group, and I reject both of them as mirror images of the feminism they’re reacting against. Mine is clearly a minority opinion here, but I’ve expressed it under my own name, I don’t have any alter egos, and I’m speaking from extensive experience of actual feminist behaviour within institutions where I’ve worked, rather than employing a dictionary definition of what feminism means as you seem to be doing, Linda. My comments to you didn’t pull any punches but they stopped well short of the personal insults that another poster has been leaving on this thread, so please don’t conflate me with him.« less

44 minutes ago

0 Likes”

Methinks this poster’s issue is with the idiot Linda – and seems to have his own perspective on feminism – which he is entitled to, and which I personally respect – so have no further comment to make on this one. But genius number three has.

“S.E Honan

@John Tangney I appreciate that clearly you have had a negative experience with certain ‘feminists’ but just like you ask not to be placed in the same box as Thomas Delaney or whatever his real name is, you should not heap all feminists into the same box. Personally, as a self-proclaimed feminist I aim to live by the dictionary definition and not harbor any prejudice against one group of individuals. Many feminists, including myself, are simply aiming to return to the dictionary definition and therefore dispel the negative connotations associated with the word.« less

36 minutes ago

2 Likes”

S.E Honan is playing the N.A.F.A.L.T (look it up ye trio of idiots) card – sigh – and in light of the stupidity of this “Many feminists, including myself, are simply aiming to return to the dictionary definition and therefore dispel the negative connotations associated with the word.”

Hard to know where to begin with this inanity isn’t it?

Is it the statement that a person lives by the terms of how something is defined in a dictionary? Though that does takes stupidity to levels I have only seen once or twice before, or is it the sheer unadulterated breathtakingly obtuse statement that people have issues with a “word

Because no MRA/MHRA’s anywhere could possibly now post reams and reams and reams of EVIDENCE as to the toxic behaviour, actions, policies, laws, programmes and motives of FEMINISTS.

 

Agent Orange files anyone?

S.C.U.M Manifesto?

Andrea Dworkin?

Amanda Marcotte?

 

How many more could I list here? 10,000, 20,000, 100,0000 examples of what feminism REALLY IS?

 

I swear to God – if this stupidity starts a global movement of “pube walks” then I’m calling for a global movement of “Willie Walks

Am thinking these idiots deserve an award – 🙂

 

And here it is – The D.A.D.A – the Dumb And Dumber Award – presented to “Linda Kelly” and “Michael Edwards” with an honourabl mention going to S.E. Honan.

 

The DADA

Advertisements

17 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. caprizchka
    May 09, 2014 @ 19:46:43

    Let’s see if I have this right. The media nags women, women nag themselves, and then they spread their wealth amongst all innocent bystanders. Got it. It would seem to me that public hair or lack or abundance thereof are the least of the author’s problems.

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 09, 2014 @ 20:10:52

      Hi Caprizcha

      Well! 🙂

      To be fair, I didn’t read the article, some of the comments were bizarre enough – some were quite interesting – when I saw the title of the article – I literally did laugh out loud.

      Here we are in Ireland with innumerable social, cultural, economic and Lord knows what else problems and the Irish Times has an article about “women shaving their pubic hair”!!!

      When I got to those pair of numbskulls comments – my brain went into “you couldn’t make this shit up” mode.
      The whole – “it’s some nefarious men’s rights conspiracy” thing.

      The “multiple identity” thing – am thinking these two have been watching too many X-files box sets!

      As for your remark,

      It would seem to me that public hair or lack or abundance thereof are the least of the author’s problems.”

      Will take your word for it – just cannot bring myself to read the stupid article – pubic hair and patriarchy – whoda thunk??? 🙂

      Reply

      • caprizchka
        May 09, 2014 @ 21:37:21

      • anjaeriud
        May 09, 2014 @ 21:52:45

        Pppppsssst lass

        No apology necessary – we could be on to something biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig here! 🙂

        Visions of fat arsed feminists embarking on Pube Walks – in the depths of winter – all goosepimply and waddley – ok – I think I just threw up in my mouth a little 🙂

        I say – BRING ON THE WILLIE WALKS – in the summer time lads 🙂

      • anjaeriud
        May 09, 2014 @ 22:52:30

        I finally psyched myself up to go read this article – now my head hurts from banging it off the wall – ah well – there are no words………………..well there are……..but they’re all rude!

        Anyhoo – I wrote that paragraph 20 mins ago – that’s how long it took for me to get my head around the fact that first this person is so obsessed with her pubic hair – and second the Irish Times published this drivel – unless they’re all pissed over there and wouldn’t notice if someone posted an article in Swahili!

        Throughout my day, whenever I’m confronted by images of women, I’m reminded that my body is disgusting. I’m too fat. I’m not tall enough. My breasts don’t look the way they should. The hair on my head is insufficiently abundant and voluminous, and the hair on the remainder of my body is loathsome and should be removed at once.

        Seriously??? THAT’S what you think about “throughout your day”? holy shit – get a bloody hobby!

        Remembering all of these things about myself can really eat into the day. It can be distracting to have to feel revolted by myself so frequently – to recall that I’m doing “being a woman” wrong. I’d recommend setting an alarm that sets off an obnoxious klaxon every seven minutes. Are you feeling bad about yourself frequently enough? Or is that yet another thing you’re failing to do properly?

        Eeeeeeeem, I really think you should go “talk to someone” professional – really – it might help with the whole “…..It can be distracting to have to feel revolted by myself so frequently”

        Yet we can all fall prey to benign acceptance of this unhelpful message that women should be something other than they are and that reality is disgusting. If you are a woman and the words you are about to read discomfit you, you have likely fallen into the trap of female self-loathing.

        I am a female and have read this article and…………………I’m just fine thanks, but you………see above!

        Waxing lyrical about the horrors of hair-removal

        Pubic hair. It grows around the genitals of sexually developed adults, and if you’re female and under 35, you are probably obsessed with yours. You cannot, however, just say “pubic hair”. You might refer to it with dainty euphemisms such as “foof” or “lady garden”, but then the point of a euphemism is to make something horrid sound more palatable.

        Pubic hair, pubic hair, pubic hair, pubic hair – nope – have no problem saying or writing it – though how would you casually slip it into conversation say about – changing the oil in your car? Hmmmmmmm, Enquiring minds want to know.

        I’m female and 52, though I was under 35 once and nope – never had a conversation about pubic hair – never thought about it, and sure as shit never called it “foof” – “FOOF” – YOU ARE KIDDING!

        When I told my mother that I intended to write about women’s pubic hair, she did not react well. Her response was along the lines of: “Why would you want to write about vulgar things that don’t matter?”

        Her response, although completely wrong (sorry mum), was pertinent. The idea that a physical feature that is common to almost every adult is “vulgar” is ridiculous. There is a taboo attached to anything related to pubic hair, which dictates that we must never discuss it outside a circle of trustworthy females, but if we really have to, we must do it in hushed tones while looking at the floor and wading through a miasma of metaphorical shame.

        You really REALLY should have listened to your mother – you have weird friends!

        A major issue
        Pubic hair matters because it is a major issue among young women. We’ve somehow become subject to the unreasonable expectations of others. However it came to be the case, it certainly is the case that very many young men expect women’s pubic hair to be either very carefully groomed or non-existent. Perhaps it is the legacy of pornography. Perhaps it’s just another means by which a misogynistic society imposes itself on women’s sense of what it means to be female. Whatever the reason, it is unadulterated nonsense.

        THIS is a “major issue”???? THIS??? Maybe I missed it, but I’ve never this as a news item on any TV station – well not in the last 30 years.

        How many young men do you fecking know? Are they lined up around the block to sign a petition demanding that ALL young women – adios the foof?

        Ye rascals!

        “Legacy of pornography?”

        Lol 🙂

        “……just another means by which a misogynistic society imposes itself on women’s sense of what it means to be female.”

        Hands up all you patriarchal misogynistic sods conspiring to have young women adios the foof – in yer secret patriarchy meetings – tut tut – ye should be ashamed of yourselves!

        “Whatever the reason, it is unadulterated nonsense”

        Well – something is “unadulterated nonsense” and it ain’t the foof fanatics – for the love of God will you go talk to someone – professional.

  2. Trackback: Pube Walks on the Wild Side | caprizchka
  3. Ron
    May 10, 2014 @ 09:04:14

    What a pair of sactimonious pricks, but then Ireland is full of small minded fools, looks like they traded one institutionalised religion for another

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 10, 2014 @ 13:19:35

      Hello and welcome Ron.

      I would agree re the “sanctimonious” tone of this pair of genius’s – in particular these two gems.

      Linda Kelly
      The Irish Times is attracting a very unsavoury ‘group’ or one person from a Mens Rights group in Ireland who is aggressively attacking anyone who dares to hold a different opinion and regularly trolls articles to leave aggressive and poisonous comments particulary aimed at ‘dangerous’ feminists/people who believe in an equal society. Just saying.”

      Now Linda here is a typical up her own arse feminist – anyone who doesn’t toe the feminist line on……..well anything…….is “unsavoury

      I just love the implication that the Irish Times is the bastion of, and last word on the correct ideological prism through which to view Irish Culture – and Linda here is tut tutting at the idea of “unsavoury” men’s rights “groups” or “persons” sullying its pristine pages with the notion that men – Irish men might be having Human Rights Abuses perpetrated against them IN this country!

      The bloody nerve! How appalling to raise such “unsavoury” issue’s – without the imprimatur of either the Irish Times or feminists like the self righteous Linda here!

      But – like I said typical feminist faux outrage – typical feminist tactic – get hysterical and outraged at anyone who “dares to hold a different opinion” that ISN’T a feminist one!

      But I did especially love Michael Edwards little mangina sally forth.

      Michael Edwards
      @Linda Kelly

      Interesting link Linda. I am all for a forum to discuss mens rights but that site is definitely not it………..”

      Isn’t that awful big of him – it’s the “I’m not a racist but…………” or the “I’m not a feminist but………….” or the “I’m not a total wanker but………………….”

      I personally am deeply impressed and gratified that this idiot is “all for a forum to discuss men’s rights” but – naturally it would have to be contained, we wouldn’t want to take any actual action, wouldn’t want all these “unsavoury” men’s rights groups” or persons to FORGET THEIR PLACE in this benighted country.

      Now would we?

      Typhonblue over at Genderratic, has done a brilliant article called “The One Good Man” and this dipshit probably considers himself to be “the one good man” published on AVfM (A Voice for Men)

      Genderratichttp://www.genderratic.com/typhonblue/
      The One Good Manhttp://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/the-one-good-man/

      What neither this idiot or the sanctimonious Linda and their ilk get is this – your’re NOT invited into the conversation – your approval is neither required nor asked for – no-one needs to “run anything by” either feminists or mangina’s.

      I mean after all – these two idiots posted these stupid comments on an article about – the apparent patriarchal pressue on women to shave their their pubic hair!!

      Impressive.

      Reply

  4. wtfwtf13
    May 11, 2014 @ 06:12:13

    What neither this idiot or the sanctimonious Linda and their ilk get is this – your’re NOT invited into the conversation – your approval is neither required nor asked for – no-one needs to “run anything by” either feminists or manginas.

    That indeed is the meat of the matter !

    And those manginas ? Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew!
    They are like the religious apologists, defending the indefensible and morally repugnant.Yet these subservient clowns and their puppeteers have the audacity to think of themselves as arbiters of social discourse.

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 11, 2014 @ 14:01:30

      Hey WTF  🙂

      And those manginas ? Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew!
      They are like the religious apologists, defending the indefensible and morally repugnant.Yet these subservient clowns and their puppeteers have the audacity to think of themselves as arbiters of social discourse.

      But. But, but but – the dictionary SAYS that feminism is……………………… “all about equalidy

      And feminists SAY they are the experts in………………………….EVERYTHING!

      Are you another one of those “unsavoury” persons? :)

      Reply

  5. Ron
    May 11, 2014 @ 10:38:11

    Thanks for the welcome,

    It’s funny that the Times still seems to have the reputation that it does, afterall, the article listed here is nothing more that tabloid tat and let’s not forget that it’s the Times that has given a platform to the braindead Una Mullaly, they seem to be desperate to drum up some attention.

    With regards to those two, I find it endlessly amusing how it always seems to be the most dense “feminists” that wade into comment sections, ignorantly spouting the rubbish they saw on facebook or read in the tabloids, it reminds me of one of my primary school teachers pointing out the class clown and reminding him that “Empty vessels make the most noise”

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 11, 2014 @ 13:56:10

      Thanks for the welcome,

      🙂

      It’s funny that the Times still seems to have the reputation that it does, afterall, the article listed here is nothing more that tabloid tat and let’s not forget that it’s the Times that has given a platform to the braindead Una Mullaly, they seem to be desperate to drum up some attention.

      You noticed that as well Ron? An entire article devoted to……………..pubic hair! Hence why I had to put it in “You couldn’t make this shit up” category” created especially for the moronic witterings of feminists and their enablers.

      With regards to those two, I find it endlessly amusing how it always seems to be the most dense “feminists” that wade into comment sections, ignorantly spouting the rubbish they saw on facebook or read in the tabloids, it reminds me of one of my primary school teachers pointing out the class clown and reminding him that “Empty vessels make the most noise”

      Again – you noticed that too? Though I do have to say that the comment by S.E Honan about “going back to the dictionary definition of feminism” – was a classic in stupidity.

      Now you do realise don’t you Ron that you have now joined the ranks of those “unsavoury” persons that the self-righteous Linda Kelly and equally obtuse Michael Edwards are appalled by – APPALLED I say – sullying the pristine and almost celestial pages of the Irish Times!

      Tut tut – you “unsavoury” person you! 🙂

      Reply

  6. donzaloog
    May 11, 2014 @ 14:56:07

    Why bother to do research when you can just insult the person in question? As for this pubic hair issue, it comes down to a matter of preference. If you like your stuff shaved go right ahead, if you like it hairy, have at it.

    The only issue is your partner’s preferences. A man asking his woman to shave her bits isn’t some nefarious scheme. Maybe he just prefers them shaved. Maybe he doesn’t want a mouthful of bush when he goes down there. It’s the same way a lot of women don’t like their men to have full beards because it itches them when their being intimate. It’s not a demand, it’s small concession we make for the people we care about.

    Another overblown feminist non-issue.

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 11, 2014 @ 18:38:18

      Hi donzaloog 🙂

      Why bother to do research when you can just insult the person in question?

      Ah now here! Doing or expecting feminists or for that matter females of a certain type to “do research” is oppressive – did you not know that?

      Only patriarchal bastards expect women to eeeeeeeeeeemm not just “make shit up”!!

      As for this pubic hair issue, it comes down to a matter of preference. If you like your stuff shaved go right ahead, if you like it hairy, have at it.

      Yep – that’s what I woulda thunk 

      The only issue is your partner’s preferences. A man asking his woman to shave her bits isn’t some nefarious scheme. Maybe he just prefers them shaved. Maybe he doesn’t want a mouthful of bush when he goes down there. It’s the same way a lot of women don’t like their men to have full beards because it itches them when their being intimate. It’s not a demand, it’s small concession we make for the people we care about.

      Oh my God! Asking a woman to make a small concession???? OPPRESSIVE! Patriarchy! Don’t think you’re really really getting the cosmic significance and importantance of yet another distressing and oppressive manifestation of patriarchy and misogyny.

      Make a small concession???? Sheesh!!! A woman???? FOR a man????

      Reply

  7. John mws
    May 13, 2014 @ 19:38:34

    Therapy for our body hair challenged dictionary feminist friend. To watch when ever a panic attack happens to her infantilized mind. Age appropriate of course. Enjoy.

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      May 14, 2014 @ 19:51:05

      Hmmmm – first of all John – well done 🙂

      Second – do ya think you might just be over-estimating by just a tad – the comprehension abilities of, while a very kind gesture by you – those persons to whom you are, as I said very kindly try to help?

      I’d be inclinded to say that your “contribution” may be too complicated, a bit over their heads, I mean there are some very hard words in that song! 🙂

      Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: