Please, please educate the fuckwits

Written By: - Date published: 11:15 am, May 11th, 2013 - 127 comments
Categories: child welfare, sexism, Social issues - Tags:

This morning news revealed an inadvertently humorous story about particularly stupid bigot – Karen Ruskin of the Pilgrim Planet Lodge in Whangarei. After causing a lesbian couple to seek alternative accommodation she made this statement to a reporter….

“This is our home, we are not a big motel,” Mrs Ruskin said. “In our home, where our grandchildren are, where our guests are, we don’t want sodomy.”

Now the meaning of the “sodomy” does mean different things in different countries. In Germany for instance “Sodomie” refers to  specifically to bestiality.  But since that is actually a crime, then one would have to ask why the police haven’t already descended on Karen Ruskin for not reporting it.  Possibly because  in NZ the legal meaning used to be enshrined in the Crimes Act and specifically referred to the anal penetration with a penis and this has been the common usage understanding of the word in the english speaking world for centuries. Well at least until Karen Ruskin managed to spin her own unique meaning on the word…

Problem was that she was talking about a lesbian couple that she’d turned away. They really don’t have the equipment for the act.

What does this idiot think was going on? That one of her guests was about to suddenly sprout a dick and start thrusting it up peoples arses? Does Karen Ruskin also believe in other dangerous absurdities like drowning suspected witches or bleeding people to cure their head colds? Can she be trusted with children in her care?

Of course she might have gained that impression that magical chains of causation and effect would happen  if she’d been listening to the fuckwits, religious or just self-ordained, in the past months. These are those people who appear to be simply obsessed by sexual activities of others without any particular cause that it appears to have addled whatever wits they had.

Religiously they seem to appear in every sect from the staid roman catholics to the  pathetic ranting of the pentecostals, across religious divides to islam and hinduism. Outside of the religious sphere, they seem to reach across class, race, and any other divides to the point that you realise that it just seems to be some systematic defect in the human genome.

I don’t think that I have observed serious objections to the passing of legislative changes to marriage that appeared to actually have taken much time to find out what they were objecting to. Like Karen Ruskin they all appeared to have displayed Coprolalia

Coprolalia is involuntary swearing or the involuntary utterance of obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory remarks. Coprolalia comes from the Greek κόπρος (kopros) meaning “feces” and λαλιά (lalia) from lalein, “to talk”.[1] The term is often used as a clinomorphism, with ‘compulsive profanity’ inaccurately referred to as being Tourette syndrome.

In the view of much of the NZ public over recent months, Karen Ruskin and other similar fuckwits have appeared to have have locked in a set of “bad words” in part of their brain and had involuntary ejeculated them inappropiately whenever they were triggered by talk of sex.

It was pretty clear that many had never bothered to look at what they were campaigning against. Because they never seemed to actually marshall any effective arguments against the law changes. Is it any wonder that they were sidelined and ignored.

Certainly as they displayed the symptoms of what appeared to be some kind of  brain defect, they ensured that the support for the bill grew.

127 comments on “Please, please educate the fuckwits ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Lanthanide 1
    11 May 2013 at 11:22 am

    Upon reading the story I had the same reaction. And then I thought “I don’t really care that some idiot doesn’t understand the english language” and forgot about it.

    Also you keep flipping between calling her “Rankin” and “Ruskin”.

    • lprent 1.1
      11 May 2013 at 11:38 am

      That was what I initially thought reading online as well.

      But I went to pick up breakfast at Blake Street for the exhausted one and saw that it was in the first few pages of the NZ Herald without that revealing quote. And it was top of kiwiblog where he’d pointed it out at the end.

      I’m just getting tired of the fuckwits after months of hearing them drone their outrage without managing to say anything of actual substance. They’re starting to just piss me off whenever I see them. So I took time off from a server in sydney that demands my attention and expressed my opinion.

      Besides. This is going to be a good way for everyone to test their webpage filters… Think of it as a public service

    • lprent 1.2
      11 May 2013 at 11:49 am

      Also you keep flipping between calling her “Rankin” and “Ruskin”.

      Thanks. Fixed. I wonder where I got that finger memory from – can’t recall a Rankin being typed for quite a few years. Maybe Christine Rankin? She got appointed to be CEO of the conservatives in addition to the Family Commission. Kind of devalues the latter in my opinion.

  2. TheContrarian 2
    11 May 2013 at 11:37 am

    Professional and erudite. LPrent is truly a Renaissance man.

    • lprent 2.1
      11 May 2013 at 11:39 am

      You forgot the /sarc

      But my profession is to do with writing c++ and other scripts for machines to deal with. What makes you think that I’d value being a writer or journalist?

      • TheContrarian 2.1.1
        11 May 2013 at 11:50 am

        “But my profession is to do with writing c++ and other scripts for machines to deal with.”

        Look at you, being all bashful. Come on, a man who can diagnose psychiatric disorders over the internet merely by observing frequency of blog postings shouldn’t be so modest.

        Anyway, you sound like a dick. Particularly in that you accuse others of suffering Coprolalia in an unnecessarily expletive laden post.

        • Tiger Mountain 2.1.1.1
          11 May 2013 at 12:04 pm

          The sound of worms turning eh TC, how the mighty have fallen in your estimation, “renaissance man” to “dick” in barely 15 min.

        • lprent 2.1.1.2
          11 May 2013 at 1:37 pm

          Come on, a man who can diagnose psychiatric disorders over the internet merely by observing frequency of blog postings shouldn’t be so modest

          Perhaps you should actually read what I actually write rather than reading into it what you think I wrote. For that matter reading the quote would have been all that was required.

          Coprolalia is a symptom – not a diagnosis. Observing symptoms is something that even patients are capable of doing. However it appears that many fuckwits prove to be incapable of self-observation or reflection.

          Lanth on the other hand invariably picks up on my actual errors. Read the first comment.

          • TheContrarian 2.1.1.2.1
            11 May 2013 at 1:43 pm

            I was referring to your hilarious belief that you were qualified to diagnose Cam Slaters depression. Remember that day? it was funny.

            • lprent 2.1.1.2.1.1
              11 May 2013 at 1:45 pm

              Don’t remember diagnosing his depression. Why would I need to? He’d announced it years ago. I’m sure if you scan for it, you’ll find the post on his site.

              • ghostrider888 …
                11 May 2013 at 1:47 pm

                speakin’ of posts; the article on Charities was very well written, and now I’m gonna write a personal petition e-mail, right now, I am.

              • TheContrarian …
                11 May 2013 at 2:39 pm

                Fading memory, lprent? You didn’t diagnose him with depression. Your diagnoses was that he wasn’t suffering depression. When I get back to my laptop and off my phone I’ll post the links and we can all have a laugh at your self importance.

              • ghostrider888 …
                11 May 2013 at 2:40 pm

                to you I mean, right now 😀

      • Populuxe1 2.1.2
        11 May 2013 at 1:03 pm

        Oh honey, come down of the cross. Someone else needs the wood.

        • lprent 2.1.2.1
          11 May 2013 at 1:53 pm

          And that relates to my comment how? I thought my answer was pretty straight forward.

          On a daily basis I type and edit something like 10x to 50x more code than I do with all of my post, moderation, commenting, emails, facebook, or documentation. That should indicate a pretty clear preference as to what I value.

          TC seemed to think that my profession was being a blogger or some kind of writer of english, when the reality is that it is something that I do under sufferance. You can see that with my steadily diminishing numbers of posts here over the years.

          When writing english I treat it like code. I’m interested in effect rather than style. Coding elegance is about getting results in the most effective way there is whilst leaving room for tweaking. As Lyn frequently points out when she reads my english (because she does like being a writer of english), my writing style is more like Pictish mallet than a pre-revolutionary french rapier.

          • Populuxe1 2.1.2.1.1
            11 May 2013 at 2:00 pm

            Yeah but could you do that without shitting all over innocent parties who do value prose? Or just take a compliment graciously? I doubt you are anywhere near as persistantly hostile as the impression you give.

            • lprent 2.1.2.1.1.1
              11 May 2013 at 3:14 pm

              There was a compliment in there – really?

              I actually value reading prose. I just don’t spent time in english writing prose because it takes time to do so (ie the re-editing until perfect). I tend to use the internal resources required to make elegant prose to instead make code elegant (and co-workers can testify that I’m a pain at that particularly on structure).

              On the other hand it also spares me those awkward launches that seem to plague writers of prose as they dither about what they imagine the effect of their prose to be. I can test code and see if it fits the requirements.

              I’m generally “hostile” here because I don’t have the time to expend on things that are not related to my duties. This isn’t playtime for me, it is unpaid work. Time spent moderating or writing posts is time not spent on fixing the site’s bugs or the many other projects that I’m involved with. Time spent commenting is time that I can’t expend writing posts. Time spent on site is time taken away from things I like to do, like reading, coding, or spending time with Lyn or the family.

              So I have an impatience with anything that wastes my time in the performance of my duties. That includes subtly worded unclear statements. I usually have a quick glance at the range of possible meanings, make a presumption that the worst interpretation is the most likely and proceed from there. I find this tends to abbreviate the time I require to finding out what people are actually trying to communicate. And 9 times out of 10, the presumption turns out to be correct.

              I prefer people to communicate with me bluntly and unambiguously….. It tends to be safer for all sides. 😈

  3. Tiger Mountain 3
    11 May 2013 at 12:02 pm

    “educate the fuckwits” one can but try, their ranks are large in Nooo Zilland.

    Kaitaia Vodafone shop. Pregnant owner loudly opining to a local yokel, “I’ll give him a clip around the ears soon as I drop, Sue Bradford doesn’t tell me what to do!, hahahaha, good hiding did me no harm hahaha”

    My horrified partner and I said “we are going to call Vodafone about your attitude and you can keep your phones”

    “Do what you f***ing like you jaffas” which given we have lived in the Far North since 1996 was a bit of an insult.

    • Populuxe1 3.1
      11 May 2013 at 1:14 pm

      Sounds like a Catherine Tate moment.

      • ghostrider888 3.1.1
        11 May 2013 at 1:20 pm

        “farkin liberties”

        • Populuxe1 3.1.1.1
          11 May 2013 at 1:23 pm

          Am I bovvered?

          • ghostrider888 3.1.1.1.1
            11 May 2013 at 1:50 pm

            larf! wotta you like; speaking of which, is it just me, or is NZ comedy still relatively weak? I caught a bit of Ben and Steve near the “octagone” and did not view anything to raise a chuckle.sigh.

            • Populuxe1 3.1.1.1.1.1
              11 May 2013 at 2:03 pm

              New Zealanders are not a funny people. Rhys Darby = QED. Billy T James turns out to have largely been false memory syndrome. Flight of the Conchords only became really funny for basically being themselves out of context in New York. Otherwise it’s all school yard bum and poo jokes, ranting, or really really old old jokes.

              • weka …
                11 May 2013 at 2:09 pm

                John Clarke! (that might rather prove your point though)

                • Populuxe1 …
                  11 May 2013 at 2:36 pm

                  John Clarke was pretty much just Fred Dagg (nothing to be ashamed of) until he crossed the ditch.

                • ghostrider888 …
                  11 May 2013 at 2:39 pm

                  I Love John Clarke; i do not even enjoy Seven Days; thank god for RAM, that’s what i say!

              • Daveosaurus …
                11 May 2013 at 5:49 pm

                Does sir require sauce on that serving of cultural cringe?

                • Populuxe1 …
                  11 May 2013 at 5:59 pm

                  It’s not cultural cringe, it’s empirical fact.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    11 May 2013 at 6:02 pm

                    that’s just hilarious. Ironic, isn’t it, assuming you are from NZ.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      12 May 2013 at 2:30 pm

                      No, CV, I am a New Zealander, so you will just have to get over your addled fantasy about me being a CIA agent. Also, what a curious bigotry that statement implies. And if you can actually name five genuinely funny NZ commedians who aren’t Michelle A’Court, I might take your pissy little snipes seriously.

                    • felix …
                      12 May 2013 at 3:01 pm

                      You not having a sense of humour =/= nz not being funny.

            • McFlock 3.1.1.1.1.2
              11 May 2013 at 6:50 pm

              The dunedin one wasn’t too bad. I really liked their New Plymouth show. And seven days usually has at least one good crack-up.

              But then I quite like a lot of billy t – not so much his last series, sadly.

              • Clockie …
                11 May 2013 at 7:11 pm

                A lot of Billy T was a bit ho-hum but I have fond memories of some moments:

                (Watch it on full screen)

  4. risildo 4
    11 May 2013 at 12:14 pm

    @ Pilgrim Planet Lodge

    They even got a **Queen Room** have to smirk @ that one

    Sad fuking bigots…. maybe she needs it up her ass but then enough shit spills out her mouth

  5. Private Baldrick 5
    11 May 2013 at 12:18 pm

    I thought this might be an article about a new school for MPs.. oh well time to take the turnip for a cup of tea

  6. fender 6
    11 May 2013 at 12:37 pm

    It could be that this Ruskin idiot has just indicated that she has been secretly watching some made for men lesbian porno movies where the strap-on becomes the lead actor. Could be that she was only thinking about a restless nights sleep for herself as she lay awake imagining all the fun others may be experiencing without her. Maybe she was concerned her own curiosity would result in her sneaking about with a glass against the door trying to listen in.

  7. Psycho Milt 7
    11 May 2013 at 12:39 pm

    I suspect that within the fundy community “sodomy” is now a term that covers any homosexual sex acts – just a general term for the sins of the people of Sodom (and I expect the residents of Sodom would have been well grumpy if they could have foreseen what religion enthusiasts would make their town famous for).

    Of course, she might have been imagining her guests fetching a strap-on out of their luggage and engaging in sodomy as the rest of us understand the term – but that paints a particularly disturbing psychological picture…

    • felix 7.1
      11 May 2013 at 1:24 pm

      Your first suspicion is, I believe, the closest to the truth. Sodomy can and does, in certain circles, refer to any sexual act not performed for the purpose of procreation.

    • lprent 7.2
      11 May 2013 at 1:33 pm

      I think that you’re proving my point. Sodomy is turning into a generic catchall for the religious and steadily getting separated from any actual meaning.

      Can you think of another class of words that operates like that?

      • Clockie 7.2.1
        11 May 2013 at 1:53 pm

        I believe they (the pilgrim planet fundies) are using the word in it’s original biblical / theological sense. ie. any act of deviant sexual practice using body parts in a way not obviously intended by the creator using ahem, intelligent design.

        PS. But not including masturbation. Different Ahh heading, under Onanism..

      • Populuxe1 7.2.2
        11 May 2013 at 2:40 pm

        It’s not new, though – “sodomy’ has always been a bit of a catch all, largely because it has never had a particular definition. Popular usage has applied it to anal sex, but otherwise there’s no definition in the Bible and legal definitions have hazily applied it to almost anything non-procreative. In US law it included oral sex. The class of words, by the way, is the Metonym.

        • felix 7.2.2.1
          11 May 2013 at 4:09 pm

          Indeed, even missionary position vagina-penis sex with the lights out counts as sodomy if contraception is employed.

  8. The Al1en 8
    11 May 2013 at 12:55 pm

    I’ve always found stupid people don’t know they’re stupid until told, although she may have just secured the future of her business catering to family first and conservative party functions.

    • ghostrider888 8.1
      11 May 2013 at 1:13 pm

      Sodom .”Cut that little child, Inside of me is such a part of you, I send that smile over to you…” 🙂
      -Backdoor Man, Opening on Mikey.

      • ghostrider888 8.1.1
        11 May 2013 at 1:20 pm

        The story is on the front page of The Dominion too; I was listening to the guys on Hauraki explaining how Womens Day (or some similar hankie) had been all voyeuristic over Ali Mau and her partner Carlene at some function, oh, and that she was having a cigarette. Well, we all know about sublimation, delusional projections, distortion, superiority complexes and repression, do we not.

  9. Populuxe1 9
    11 May 2013 at 1:21 pm

    Looking at the pictures of the decor, I couldn’t help but wonder how any of my LGBT cohort could overome their aesthetic scruples long enough to set foot in such a hideola establishment, little own wish to physically express their love there.

  10. Foreign Waka 10
    11 May 2013 at 1:42 pm

    A bit disappointed at the article being so one sided. In a true democracy anyone can have their dream and everyone can realize it within the law. The BB Lodge couple just did that and deserve as much respect for their view as any other person. Sadly, no one has the guts to stand up for the right of this everyday couple. Very disappointed at the reactions of the crowd here that on so many occasions have reiterated their belief in the right for all NZleaenders be they rich or poor. I made the mistake by thinking that there is indeed some intellectual rigor. So now I am a fuckwit, I can live with that as long as I can look into the mirror and know I am at least stand by my principle of equal rights for EVERYONE.

    • ghostrider888 10.1
      11 May 2013 at 1:44 pm

      discriminantly

      • Foreign Waka 10.1.1
        11 May 2013 at 1:50 pm

        What are you implying?

        • ghostrider888 10.1.1.1
          11 May 2013 at 1:52 pm

          what are you inferring?

          • Clockie 10.1.1.1.1
            11 May 2013 at 1:57 pm

            Heh

          • Foreign Waka 10.1.1.1.2
            11 May 2013 at 1:58 pm

            This was an honest question, you are evading this means you obviously have no contribution just confrontation in mind. Your turn…

            • weka 10.1.1.1.2.1
              11 May 2013 at 2:07 pm

              I thought it was pretty clear.

              You said:

              “I am at least stand by my principle of equal rights for EVERYONE.”

              g888 said: “discriminantly”

              Put them together and you have:

              I am at least stand by my principle of equal rights for EVERYONE, discriminantly.

              • ghostrider888 …
                11 May 2013 at 2:35 pm

                thank you weka; the machine-half of me likes your style of mining data and predicting where the kernels lie 😀

            • Clockie 10.1.1.1.2.2
              11 May 2013 at 2:14 pm

              Where to start? The P P (PILGRIM planet lodge) “couple” are indeed living in a democracy, which has decided that you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of their sexuality (or religion etc) when you are providing goods and services. Or when you are employing people. There are very few exceptions. One such is being tested now with the case of the gay-would-be-trainee-Anglican-priest. Another is the “get out of jail free card” clause which the PP lot are trying to use which says when you’re letting room in a shared living space etc. But they would need to prove the validity of that one in court and personally I think they’d be lucky to win. So are they operating within the law, or within the guidelines for operating within a modern secular society? Perhaps I would have a little more respect for the courage of their convictions if they were honest and made it clear on their signage and advertising that they were a Christian based organisation that only caters to married heterosexual couples who have sex in the missionary position and no sodomites or Onanists are welcome.. But I doubt very much whether they’ll do that.

              PS. I have lots more of this sort of thing in reserve 🙂

            • Clockie 10.1.1.1.2.3
              11 May 2013 at 2:50 pm

              @ Foreign Waka

              “This was an honest question, you are evading this means you obviously have no contribution just confrontation in mind. Your turn…”

              Over to you..

    • weka 10.2
      11 May 2013 at 2:00 pm

      FW, you think that accommodation providers should be allowed to turn away patrons on the basis of sexuality? How about class? Or disability? Or ethnicity? Or age? Where is the line?

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.3
      11 May 2013 at 2:08 pm

      I think you misunderstand the purpose of human rights: they are there to protect people from bigots, not to protect bigots from their own prejudices.

    • lprent 10.4
      11 May 2013 at 2:27 pm

      A bit disappointed at the article being so one sided. In a true democracy anyone can have their dream and everyone can realize it within the law.

      The problem is that what the Ruskins did was almost certainly outside the law. It has been ever since homosexuality was legalised a few decades ago.

      By your “true democracy” criteria, they could also have turned away anyone of the wrong race, marital status, or anything that they felt like. Similarly you could extend it to refusing to serve redheads, people with freckles, wearing the wrong coloured shirt or for having an ugly voice. Exactly where would you place the boundaries?

      You could then try to ameliorate it with signs that said “No jews, nigras, redheads, green shirts, old people, god-haters, or faggots” so people could have some warning of what someones particular bigotries were. At least that may save people from turning up to a previously booked motel room…

      The legal presumption of the human rights and other legislation is that to turn people away without cause or a legal reason requires an explanation about why it is not simple bigotry. So the legal process has been started with a complaint to the appropriate court. The Ruskins can explain their decision there and probably later in an actual court. It isn’t that much different to someone beating the crap out of someone else.

      The process requires that everyone should equally be able to be held to account for their decisions. It doesn’t matter if it is bigotry, thieving, or assault.

      Incidentally, your “true democracy” sounds a hell of a lot like it leads to the true democracy as practised in the american south prior to the late 1960’s where the state also found reasons to not register people to vote. Anyone can do anything just so long as it conforms to the rule of the voting majority. That is determined by who controls the police and the courts.

      The arbitrar of a functioning society is the rule of a fair law. The Ruskins look to be in violation of laws of this country.

      The BB Lodge

      Now that is a stretch. It is a motel/hotel. Read their website.

      • Foreign Waka 10.4.1
        11 May 2013 at 3:15 pm

        lprent – thank you for your reply. However, I stay by my words. Having a lodge, motel or BB does not make everything you own public goods. Unless you declare it to be so. If this is the case, then we are certainly not living in a democracy. It is my view that the couple does have the right to choose their clientele. And yes, they also need to declare this in their advertising.
        Having rights and using these within the law does not mean being the same (as oppose to being equal) and it also does not mean that one has to like what the other has to say, do etc.
        As to sexuality in our society generally, this is a separate and quite fraught issue given the freedoms of religion, opinion and lifestyles that become more diversified in NZ. It seems however, that this is exactly the underlying issue that is played out here and not the question of civil rights in the sense of the law given the quite emotional, sometimes even very negative responses. Considerate effort needs to be made to not have this and the past events having a forum that looks more like a circus than an honest debate.

        “The arbitrar of a functioning society is the rule of a fair law. The Ruskins look to be in violation of laws of this country”
        I don’t belief in reinterpretation of the law, because it is the rule of the law that makes society function. If everybody can reinterpret what they regard as “fair” it would be the wild west.

        “Incidentally, your “true democracy” sounds a hell of a lot like it leads to the true democracy as practised in the american south prior to the late 1960′s where the state also found reasons to not register people to vote. Anyone can do anything just so long as it conforms to the rule of the voting majority. That is determined by who controls the police and the courts”.

        I think you completely misinterpret my comment ( In a true democracy anyone can have their dream and everyone can realize it within the law. The BB Lodge couple just did that and deserve as much respect for their view as any other person) and I do have some difficulties following you on this one. You may have misunderstood this? Otherwise, my assertion is that you are mischievously brought now the American civil rights cases on race into the issue to award you the readers sympathy.

        • Clockie 10.4.1.1
          11 May 2013 at 3:27 pm

          You can “stay (sic) by your words” all you want, but the fact of the matter is, that in this country, when you open to “the public” you open to all the public not just the ones whose religion, colour or beliefs happen to appeal to you. You can turn people away for other reasons but not things that are protected under human rights legislation. So according to you, we’re definitely not living in a democracy because we’re not allowed to discriminate against other people. Comparing this situation to the pre Civil Rights era in the American South is simply ludicrous.

          • Foreign Waka 10.4.1.1.1
            11 May 2013 at 3:42 pm

            I belief you just have proven my point in regards to my comment that considerate effort needs to be made to not make this a circus.

            http://www.legislation.co.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304634.html

            • Clockie 10.4.1.1.1.1
              11 May 2013 at 4:09 pm

              Your cited reference does not apply in the case of the PP Lodge. They are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. They are NOT providing accomodation:

              “accommodation … only for persons of the same sex, marital status, or religious or ethical belief, or for persons with a particular disability, or for persons in a particular age group.”

              They have a choice. They open to the public and abide by the anti discrimination laws, or they open only to people of their religious and ethical belief and advertise accordingly. As usual with people like this they want to have their cake and eat it too..

              I would point out that it is your own argument which is the intellectual equivalent of directing a bear in a tutu to ride a bicycle around a circus.

        • Colonial Viper 10.4.1.2
          11 May 2013 at 3:49 pm

          However, I stay by my words. Having a lodge, motel or BB does not make everything you own public goods.

          You’re a damn fool if you think that is what the issue is. You’re also a damn fool for thinking that business behaviour should not be regulated in this country.

          • Foreign Waka 10.4.1.2.1
            11 May 2013 at 4:03 pm

            Why are you starting to swear at me? No need for that in a civilized debate. And yes, it seems that this becomes now a circus.

            • Colonial Viper 10.4.1.2.1.1
              11 May 2013 at 5:14 pm

              lol “damn fool” is being sworn at??? I apologise for such uncouth language with cap in hand, my lady.

  11. weka 11
    11 May 2013 at 2:02 pm

    ““This is our home, we are not a big motel,” Mrs Ruskin said. “In our home, where our grandchildren are, where our guests are, we don’t want sodomy.””

    I’d like to know how she educated her grandchildren to know what two lesbian women might be doing behind closed doors.

    • Arfamo 11.1
      11 May 2013 at 2:14 pm

      Perhaps they have their own internet access to adult sites & educated her?

      • Clockie 11.1.1
        11 May 2013 at 2:26 pm

        I’d like to know how Mrs. Ruskin keeps a check on the sexual practices of her heterosexual guests. I mean, first of all, do they have to show their marriage certificate? Do they have to sign a declaration (duly witnessed by a JP) that they do not practice “sodomy” (meaning anything not intended by the creators intelligent design concept)? how far are the owners of Pilgrim Planet prepared to follow their reasoning down this rather boggy philosophical path? Have they put any real thought into it or did it…. Oh never mind. I don’t want to know after all. Who gives an ARAS what they think.

    • pollywog 11.2
      11 May 2013 at 2:15 pm

      Smile…you’re on candid camera 🙂

    • lprent 11.3
      11 May 2013 at 2:30 pm

      Hidden cameras?

      More likely an over-fertile imagination.

      Edit: pollywog beat me to it.

    • Tim 11.4
      11 May 2013 at 2:58 pm

      yet I’d bet that if 2 All Blacks had turned up and asked for a ‘double’, in her mind there probably couldn’t possible be anything ‘suspect’ going on.
      Posts like this, I find utterly amusing. The PP I feel sorry for – they obviously haven’t thought things through but have protested THEIR rights as opposed to those of their ‘guests’ – for which they receive a fee. But I also feel sorry for the cohort I apparently also fit (LGBT -in that I’ve had relationships with both sexes -AND that same cohort that is happy to brand me).
      What amuses me most though is the assumption that somehow the LGBTI cohort are incapable of prejudice – whereas those that belong to it know that’s not really the case:

      – Gay men who can be the most mysogenistic on the planet. The references to (stale) ‘fish’; references to the ‘gash’, or ‘fish’ that represents female genitalia…
      – Men who regard themselves as ‘str8’, merely on the basis that they don’t take it up the arse but who are perfectly happy to deliver it to any port in a storm (prevalent in many PI/Melanesian cultures)
      – separatist lezbeans
      – Certain TS commenters, who when their egos are unravelled could occupy the surface area of the entire Universe two times over and who are quick to chant racism, sexism, etc. to others but who seem perfectly comfortable with ageism
      – the expectation that those who belong to that (but ANY cohort), must therefore be OUT and proud and advertise their sexuality (or whatever) to all and sundry or, (when they don’t actually see it as a big deal) have to be branded with ‘closet’ labels. (Personally I’ve never denied the fact that I’ve fucked men).

      I’m uncomfortable with that pathetic PP crew simply because they want to inflict their values on others by any means – including the power they think they have; their use of ‘grandchildren’ as their excuse and justification for THEIR prejudices; and the ‘right’ they think they have to ASSUME any future guests they might have – for which they are perfectly happy to take a fee – are going to confirm to their stereotypical notions.
      After all, borax is just as likely to remove mixed sex cum stains as it is same sex cum stains.
      I’d be more worried about bed bugs.
      J’accuse!.

      • pollywog 11.4.1
        11 May 2013 at 3:01 pm

        Bacon, Lettuce and Tomato…but what does the G stand for?

      • Rogue Trooper 11.4.2
        11 May 2013 at 4:14 pm

        well, there is inter-generational “ageism”, socio-political economic “ageism”, environmentally-concerned “ageism” and then there is “ageism”.(an you’d be surprised how many ports cheer a storm).

        btw, there is some elder-abuse going on over my back fence; Beware the sign-maker when he gets a phone, is all I have to say on that matter!

        • Tim 11.4.2.1
          11 May 2013 at 9:41 pm

          Bugger! I kind of like the occasional Gerkin, and sometimes pickled onions aren’t too bad either.
          And somehow I’d rather a bit of gayonaise than the cheap shit currently on offer at the local New World.
          Beggars can’t be choosers tho’ apparently.

          Oh…and here’s a tip for the Pilgrim Planet Lodge. That cheapest of cheap shit washing powder that comes in various scents (Aloe Vera et al, ffs – HOW do they do it!) for dollar nine-ee-nine at the local minimum wage, yoof-rated market (super-ised, mega-rised), is probably better that Surf (even though Surf and I have been together for 35 years)

  12. felix 12
    11 May 2013 at 4:39 pm

    I just noticed the picture for this post, the placard reading “1 man + 1 woman = marriage.”

    How funny. Of course it’s true, just as 4 + 5 = 9 is true. But then so does 1 + 8. And 7 + 2. and 3 + 3 + 3.

    lolz at fundies, no wonder they find logic so hard.

    • Tim 12.1
      11 May 2013 at 9:59 pm

      There ya go Felix -you got it!
      There’s more than one way to add up to 9

      It’s a shame Blinglish, the Keydom et les ‘autres haven’t yet realised. (Bitter old queens included)

  13. prism 13
    11 May 2013 at 6:40 pm

    How incredible. She has grand children – does that mean she has had sexual intercourse?
    ‘Oh’ say all those Mr and Mrs Prudes, ‘We don’t use words like that here’. And does she get her residents to sign a pledge that they won’t indulge in any of that ghastly carry-on while between her sheets?

    It is shameful that we still have these two-faced people who despise themselves, their own bodies and other humans. This is the sort of thinking that Irish Catholics came up with when they put their daughters into the Magdalene Home. Just perverse and vicious in their so-called purity and hypocrisy.
    http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/the-magdalene-sisters/trailer

    Ranting against women and men having homosexual relationships just comes from the same rejection and distaste of sex that shows itself at any provocation.

    • Populuxe1 13.1
      12 May 2013 at 2:37 pm

      “Manuel! Where IS that Barcelonan?! Sybil?! Polly?! Anyone????”

    • David H 13.2
      12 May 2013 at 5:37 pm

      Lets just hope her Grand kids are not wanting their inheritance early. All they would have to do is show Granny this, and the comments section on Kiwi Blog, (too scared to look at the slime page) to her, and hey presto instant coronary.

  14. millsy 14
    11 May 2013 at 9:17 pm

    For the Ruskins, a length of piano wire would solve the ‘problem’ of homosexuality.

    We must be forever vigilant, as there are those out there who wish to dictate how people wish to live their lives, and will petition the government to do it.

    • Psycho Milt 14.1
      11 May 2013 at 10:24 pm

      For the Ruskins, a length of piano wire would solve the ‘problem’ of homosexuality.

      I know you firmly believe this, on the basis of projection (you think a length of piano wire would solve the ‘problem’ of tories, so…), but it’s not a widely-shared belief.

      We must be forever vigilant, as there are those out there who wish to dictate how people wish to live their lives, and will petition the government to do it.

      The weight of irony in a statement like this from a left-winger has probably just shifted the planet from its orbit – please don’t make any more comments like this…

  15. Descendant Of Sssmith 15
    11 May 2013 at 11:28 pm

    Could have at least offered them a bed in the stable.

    If they have never slept with a man presumably either of them could still have a virgin birth.

    The owners could then get a mention in the “even newer testament” as having turned away the two mothers of little Jesus II.

    It’s interesting eh PM that by far the majority of the people who want to tell others as individuals how to live and what is best for us are from the right.

    Maybe all those laws that are being passed to increase our prison population bypass you as do the increase in laws that allow surveillance on you and your kin, as do the restrictive but secret discussions on trans-country partnership agreements.

    The right generally attack personal freedoms, the left generally rail against corporate freedoms in this modern age.

    Personally I strongly favour the freedom of the individual over the freedom of the corporate. In this day and age where people need money to have a reasonable freedom there cannot be any sort of freedom for an individual without food on the table and a roof over the head.

    That takes society not individuals and currently business seems particularly useless at providing for all. There’s no shortage of money but there sure is a paucity of will.

    • Rogue Trooper 15.1
      11 May 2013 at 11:44 pm

      Bogard this post-Panopticism III with your weeties my friend; did you write as T.W? btw, I have a copy of apocrypha and subsequent “Testamental” writings for reference. 😀

  16. Murray Olsen 16
    12 May 2013 at 1:40 am

    I might stop in Whangarei next time I’m going through and commit a bit of sodomy in their motel. Not sure which type yet.

  17. Observer Tokoroa 17
    12 May 2013 at 4:38 am

    @Lprent

    I enjoy so much of your commentary. But I do not enjoy your arrogance over persons less educated than you.

    The problem is that when educated people like you look in a mirror, they are likely to see an educated genius – when in reality there is only a ranting Fuckwit present.

    • Populuxe1 17.1
      12 May 2013 at 2:40 pm

      How about taking the responsibility to educate yourself before projecting onto people about how they communicate

    • Clockie 17.2
      12 May 2013 at 2:44 pm

      So “uneducated” people should get a free pass to be bigots should they? Not sure whether the people you’re defending are uneducated or simply bigoted but either way you think they should receive a “get out of jail free card” to say and do anything they like without getting told just what red necked tools they are making of themselves? What’s their excuse pray tell? You don’t need a university education to have a sense of human decency and a basic feel for the human rights laws we’re all expected to abide by. The only possible excuses are: a) they’re bigots. b) they live with head up arse. c) terminally stupid so best to keep trap shut.

    • Murray Olsen 17.3
      12 May 2013 at 6:54 pm

      Which parts of the commentary do you actually enjoy?
      What I’ve noticed as I’ve made my way through life is that a person is usually classed as either a ranting fuckwit or an educated genius based on whether we agree with what they’re saying or not. But then, I’m probably just an educated fuckwit who rants now and then.

      • Arfamo 17.3.1
        12 May 2013 at 6:59 pm

        Nope, reckon you’re spot on there. My experience is that most people measure your intelligence by whether or not you agree with them.

  18. ghostrider888 18
    12 May 2013 at 12:08 pm

    Neo-un-orthodoxy, for the bigots reading this.

  19. Brett Dale 19
    13 May 2013 at 5:20 pm

    Homophobic’s will never be educated, they will remain the same until the day they died, here’s hoping all mp’s who voted against the gay marriage bill, loss their seat. But thanks to freakin mmp that wont happen.