should they be buried together?

fischerspooner

I read in the paper yesterday about the funeral of that mad woman that killed both her boys and then herself. It said "tragic mum" was to be buried with both her kids. It got me thinking - if it were a man that killed his two sons, would they use to word "tragic", or the world "psycho"? Would they bury a man beside two boys that he murdered? Surely not... why is this?

senordingdong

Well she's not going to do them any harm now.

AngryBadger

Why do you assume they wouldn't bury a man with his two sons if he had killed them?

constitutionus

fischerspooner wrote:

I read in the paper yesterday about the funeral of that mad woman that killed both her boys and then herself. It said "tragic mum" was to be buried with both her kids. It got me thinking - if it were a man that killed his two sons, would they use to word "tragic", or the world "psycho"? Would they bury a man beside two boys that he murdered? Surely not... why is this?

because ireland is anti men, go down the family law court any day and see what i mean. blokes are pretty much the only demographic you can discriminate against and get away with it. just look at how blokes are portrayed in advertising:rolleyes:

LadyJ

constitutionus wrote:

because ireland is anti men, go down the family law court any day and see what i mean. blokes are pretty much the only demographic you can discriminate against and get away with it. just look at how blokes are portrayed in advertising:rolleyes:

I agree with what you are saying here but I also believe that men are treated more sympathetically by society a lot of the time.

For example,when a man's wife dies,people will come to the house,cook for him,clean for him,discuss "what on earth he's going to do now" and generally treat him as if his life is over and he's reverted to some child-like state.

However,for women,it's the opposite. They are expected to always get on with things and the death of a loved one is just another burden of womanhood etc.

My point is that both men and women get raw deals in different aspects of life and that probably won't ever change.

constitutionus

LadyJ wrote:

My point is that both men and women get raw deals in different aspects of life and that probably won't ever change.

which is a disgrace. basic human compassion should extend to everyone. when my dad died my neighbours were amazing. always dropping in to my mum to see how shes doing and trying to get her out and socialising. they still do that now seven years later.

the one worry i have about modern life is i dont see these kinds or relationships developing in the new estates and appartments that are popping up all over the place. i have an awfull feeling theres gonna be alot of lonely people who're surrounded by people:(

LadyJ

constitutionus wrote:

which is a disgrace. basic human compassion should extend to everyone.

I agree but I'd be a fool to believe that I'll ever see such a world in my lifetime.

i have an awfull feeling theres gonna be alot of lonely people who're surrounded by people:(

There already are and there always have been.

Supercell

Does physical separation really matter when you are dead?
I suppose if there is something after then discussions are ensuing already.

senordingdong

LadyJ wrote:

I agree with what you are saying here but I also believe that men are treated more sympathetically by society a lot of the time.

Sorry but I have to disagree, with your example atleast.

And it is true, white males aged 18-35 are treated like vermin in the justice system.

LadyJ

Longfield wrote:

Does physical separation really matter when you are dead?

I think the OP is just trying to make a point about society being sexist,I doubt he's making any kind of point about the afterlife.

LadyJ

senordingdong wrote:

Sorry but I have to disagree, with your example atleast.

And it is true, white males aged 18-35 are treated like vermin in the justice system.

I agree,but while men are discriminated against by the justice system,I find that women are discriminated against just as much in every day life.

senordingdong

I disagree with you because it seems that in this day and age, everybody strives so much to be PC, not becasue they care, but because they could have something to lose if they're not.
In the midst of this, it seems no-one has taken into consideration, the rights of the once Alpha group...white males 18-35.

Basically what I'm saying is that sexual discrimination (against females atleast) seems to be something of an urban legend in this day and age, simply because anyone in a position to do so, would be too scared to do it. And would be royally ****ed if they were caught.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

I agree,but while men are discriminated against by the justice system,I find that women are discriminated against just as much in every day life.

In what ways are women discriminated against?

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

In what ways are women discriminated against?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054891784

I think some of the comments on this thread will give you a taste of what I mean. If the OP was a bloke,I think there'd have been a great deal more positive support.

And this is only one example. I still agree that men get a terrible time when it comes to the justice system but I also believe that women get a hard time for many day-to-day things that are seen as perfectly acceptable when done by a man.

AngryBadger

I don't think that thread qualifies as discrimination. Yes some people are wailing on the OP, but some of those people are women, and some other people are cheering her on, it all seems fairly balanced to me.

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

I don't think that thread qualifies as discrimination. Yes some people are wailing on the OP, but some of those people are women, and some other people are cheering her on, it all seems fairly balanced to me.

And who says that you have to be a man to discriminate against women?

senordingdong

If that's the case I'm not sure it helps your point LadyJ.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

And who says that you have to be a man to discriminate against women?

......if you're saying it;s discrimination against women, then it's discrimination on the basis of sex, which is SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION, I don't realy see how a woman can do this to another woman.

UNless you're talking about just being bitchy, but that#'s not discrimination, it's just being bitchy

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

......if you're saying it;s discrimination against women, then it's discrimination on the basis of sex, which is SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION, I don't realy see how a woman can do this to another woman.

UNless you're talking about just being bitchy, but that#'s not discrimination, it's just being bitchy

I think you're wrong. People of the same race can be racist towards their own. There are women who hate woman and men who hate men.

My point is that there are many different kinds of discrimination(including sexual discrimination) and it is not always men that are on the receiving end.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

My point is that there are many different kinds of discrimination(including sexual discrimination) and it is not always men that are on the receiving end.

Sorry but that's like saying there is a sky.

Of course there are many forms of discrimination, and I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that only men experienced it.

Rb

No she shouldn't be buried with them, she should be buried in an unmarked grave somewhere in the middle of nowhere and left there to rot.
You don't bury a muderer next to their victims, especially if their victims happen to be their own children.
The husband has to visit those graves remember, I'm sure he could go without being reminded every time he goes up to see the graves of the psycho b1tch that took the two he held dearest in his life.

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

Sorry but that's like saying there is a sky.

Of course there are many forms of discrimination, and I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that only me experienced it.

This is so funny. All I was saying at the start was that men and women both get a tough time in different areas of life and that that is sh!t but that's the way it is. End of story. I agree with what the OP is saying but I was merely suggesting that while men have it tough when it comes to the law,women have it tough in other areas. I don't see why this is causing such an uproar.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

This is so funny. All I was saying at the start was that men and women both get a tough time in different areas of life and that that is sh!t but that's the way it is. End of story. I agree with what the OP is saying but I was merely suggesting that while men have it tough when it comes to the law,women have it tough in other areas. I don't see why this is causing such an uproar.

Uproar? I think not

Moreover, I'm not saying i disagree with you, but I have asked you to give an example of this, and in my estimation you haven't done so.

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

Uproar? I think not

Moreover, I'm not saying i disagree with you, but I have asked you to give ma an example of this, and in my estimation you haven't done so.

Ok,let's see... How about women are paid,on average around 20% less than men for doing the same job?

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

Ok,let's see... How about women are paid,on average around 20% less than men for doing the same job?

Source?

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

Source?

The Guardian

ST*

fischerspooner wrote:

I read in the paper yesterday about the funeral of that mad woman that killed both her boys and then herself

The above comment annoys the sh*t out of me.
Pure ignorance.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

The Guardian

Can you be more specific

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

Can you be more specific

I'm afraid I don't remember the date but you're welcome to go to the website and have a look.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

I'm afraid I don't remember the date but you're welcome to go to the website and have a look.

.......:rolleyes:

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

.......:rolleyes:

Fair enough. You wanted a source and I've given you one.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

Fair enough. You wanted a source and I've given you one.

I've heard that 60 per cent of the time, your' sources work 100 per cent of the time

fischerspooner

Shock_treatment wrote:

The above comment annoys the sh*t out of me.
Pure ignorance.

how is it ignorant? because I called her a mad woman? Seriously do you expect us to give sympathy to someone who murders her children?? You've just proved my point, if it were a man you'd never get angry if I called him a madman.

LadyJ

AngryBadger wrote:

I've heard that 60 per cent of the time, your' sources work 100 per cent of the time

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gender/story/0,,1712162,00.html#article_continue

Rb

Shock_treatment wrote:

The above comment annoys the sh*t out of me.
Pure ignorance.

I don't see why tbh.
Its one thing to kill yourself but to take two innocent children with you can only qualify you as a mad b1tch.
Theres absolutely no excusing it and I for one hope she rots in hell.

Sorry to be so...."ignorant" about it.

Rb

fischerspooner wrote:

You've just proved my point, if it were a man you'd never get angry if I called him a madman.

Exactly. If it were a man I'm sure all the women(including Shock_Treatment though she may deny it) would be calling him a psycho, a lunatic etc and you can be damn sure all the guys wouldn't be defending him.
But oh no, apparently a psychopathic murderer can't be called so if she is a woman.

lodgepole

rb_ie wrote:

I'm sure he could go without being reminded every time he goes up to see the graves of the psycho b1tch that took the two he held dearest in his life.

The three he held dearest in his life I imagine.

AngryBadger

Thanks for the link. But that article seems to be saying that the reason women earn less is because they tend to go for lower paid positions in the first place, and they don't tend to be as geared toward career advancement/money as men.

Surely that's an individual perspective that every woman needs to revise for herself?

Sangre

Women get paid the same. Fact. Too lazy to link.
They get paid less because they WORK less hours.

AngryBadger

Sangre wrote:

Women get paid the same. Fact. Too lazy to link.
They get paid less because they WORK less hours.

Linkage in fairness

Rb

Lodgepole wrote:

The three he held dearest in his life I imagine.

Thats debatable.

LadyJ

In the article I've linked to I realise that there are many reasons for women earning less but discrimination is still a factor. I've given an example and backed up my original point so I aint gonna drag this out.

Rb

LadyJ wrote:

I aint gonna drag this out.

thank God for that.

AngryBadger

LadyJ wrote:

I aint gonna drag this out.

fair enough

Rb

LadyJ wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gender/story/0,,1712162,00.html#article_continue

I see,to absolutely no surprise,that that was written by a woman therefore I personally take it with a pinch of salt. As did I with a similar article I read in The Economist.

Odds are she's a lesbian also.

AngryBadger

rb_ie wrote:

I see,to absolutely no surprise,that that was written by a woman therefore I personally take it with a pinch of salt. As did I with a similar article I read in The Economist.

Odds are she's a lesbian also.

man...how is that helping? Just take the article for what it's worth

dbnavan

This thread is sick!!

The woman was a mother and a wife, she was obviously physiologically unwell, it is not up to us, most of who don’t know the family. To decide weather or not she is buried with her kids or whatever that is totally the family’s choice, namely the grieving father. People who have suffered depression or similar problems know that 'some' choices made during depressive moments don’t always in anyway reflect the person 99% of the rest of the time,

May they all rest in peace.

constitutionus

AngryBadger wrote:

Linkage in fairness

he's on the level, i cant remember the source myself. i think its the ESRI but im not sure. but apparently 90% of all overtime is done by men resulting in women working on average 10 hours less than men.
in that context its OBVIOUS men will earn more and deservedly so. surely women arent advocating pay for work they havent done now THAT would be discrimination

LadyJ

rb_ie wrote:

I see,to absolutely no surprise,that that was written by a woman therefore I personally take it with a pinch of salt. As did I with a similar article I read in The Economist.

Odds are she's a lesbian also.

Thanks for helping my argument. Look no further for that sexual discrimination AngryBadger!

ST*

rb_ie wrote:

I don't see why tbh.
Its one thing to kill yourself but to take two innocent children with you can only qualify you as a mad b1tch.
Theres absolutely no excusing it and I for one hope she rots in hell.
Sorry to be so...."ignorant" about it.

Typical response from you tbh

Rb

dbnavan wrote:

This thread is sick!!

The woman was a mother and a wife, she was obviously physiologically unwell, it is not up to us, most of who don’t know the family. To decide weather or not she is buried with her kids or whatever that is totally the family’s choice, namely the grieving father. People who have suffered depression or similar problems know that 'some' choices made during depressive moments don’t always in anyway reflect the person 99% of the rest of the time,

May they all rest in peace.

Think you'd have the same attitude if you were the husband and everything that you held dearest was taken away in an extremely violent and bloody manner?
I somehow don't think so.

If it were my wife she'd be heading the same way the christmas tree did.Save a fortune.

AngryBadger wrote:

man...how is that helping? Just take the article for what it's worth

Oh I am taking it for what its worth, believe me.