PM: To Kate McCaan

[minestrone]

Yawn. You're such a dullard for a self-proclaimed educated man.

I'm not self proclaimed, I have the degree certificates to prove it you thick twunt.

Anyway, you seem to rate yourself as superdad, all through this thread and on previous threads it is "i'm taking the wee man swimming" or "the kid is in bed now thanks to me and my great parenting". It is like he is there as moral currency to bet with on an internet forum.

I tell you what, you have been banging on about the McCanns and their awful parenting for years on this forum, I'll stick my neck out and place a wager with anyone that you won't be in the house when he gets into high school.

You have form for family break ups so I'll even give odds. Who wants some?

[Churchill]

I'm not self proclaimed, I have the degree certificates to prove it you thick twunt.

Anyway, you seem to rate yourself as superdad, all through this thread and on previous threads it is "i'm taking the wee man swimming" or "the kid is in bed now thanks to me and my great parenting". It is like here is there as moral currency to bet with on an internet forum.

I tell you what, you have been banging on about the McCanns and their awful parenting for years on this forum, I'll stick my neck out and place a wager with anyone that you won't be in the house when he gets into high school.

You have form for family break ups so I'll even give odds. Who wants some?

Oi Jaffa, where's your sense of commitment? Doesn't she want to breed with a Scots drunkard? Something wrong with you pencil-dick? Never sober enough to get it up?

Send her down to Suity next time he's in SpaceHopper mode. He'll do what you're incapable of.

[minestrone]

Oi Jaffa, where's your sense of commitment? Doesn't she want to breed with a Scots drunkard? Something wrong with you pencil-dick? Never sober enough to get it up?

There you go again "I have a child and I am going to use him to argue with someone on an internet forum".

Feck knows what your split up will be like when you are using him as pawn for disagreements already.

So how much that you don't get to send him of to High school as a couple? you seem quite willing to use him as a device for engagement in this so fair is fair. I am seriously willing to place bets here.

[Churchill]

There you go again "I have a child and I am going to use him to argue with someone on an internet forum".

Feck knows what your split up will be like when you are using him as pawn for disagreements already.

So how much that you don't get to send him of to High school as a couple? you seem quite willing to use him as a device for engagement in this so fair is fair. I am seriously willing to place bets here.

Yeah, I have a child, you don't.

You say you have 3 degrees - and the CERTIFICATES TO PROVE IT!

Small compensation for being too **** ugly to breed with imho.

Carry on carrying on.

What's up? The VC boys blow you out?

[minestrone]

Just have my first poster ask me by PM what odds I'm offering.

[DodgyAgent]

Yeah, I have a child, you don't.

You say you have 3 degrees - and the CERTIFICATES TO PROVE IT!

Small compensation for being too **** ugly to breed with imho.

Carry on carrying on.

What's up? The VC boys blow you out?

I have 5 kids so according to your logic I am better than you at bringing up children, I am more virile than you and needless to say I am more attractive to women than you are. As a parent I/we constantly question ourselves as to whether we are looking after our children in the right way. We have sometimes let them go out or go away aware of the risk of them being knifed, beaten up, sold drugs to or whatever. Thankfully as far as we know none of this has happened to the point where we have a problem with a child.

Even now we question whether we have spoilt them or not given them enough attention. We have at times left them alone when we probably should not have done, but we have taken into account other factors to mitigate the risk and at times we have been careless. We have always left them with childminders and babysitters at many stages of their lives and anything could have happened to them even if we had been asleep in a bedroom nearby.

We do not tick boxes about child rearing/care and nor do we succumb to criticism from others (especially my mother in law who like you enjoys manipulating her daughter by stirring guilt). It does not matter if something happens to one of our children and we think we have "covered ourselves in risk mitigation" in order to satisfy those who see themselves as evangelists in child care. The feeling of guilt would be as strong whatever the circumstances of losing a child no matter how it happened.
What is worrying is that you don't see it like this. You see it as a set of rules that say if you have not brought your children up according to Churchills law then you do not deserve any sympathy if something happens to your child.

Which is why I say it is not the Mcanns who have a problem in how they rear their kids, it is those who seek to judge them in the cruel manner that people like you do.

The reason I point you to the press and commentators on this subject is because there is no one in the mainstream world of journalism/childcare that subscribes to your heartless view.

You should read other peoples views more before imposing the sanctity of your very narrow experience upon others.

[Churchill]

I have 5 kids so according to your logic I am better than you at bringing up children, I am more virile than you and needless to say I am more attractive to women than you are. As a parent I/we constantly question ourselves as to whether we are looking after our children in the right way. We have sometimes let them go out or go away aware of the risk of them being knifed, beaten up, sold drugs to or whatever. Thankfully as far as we know none of this has happened to the point where we have a problem with a child.

Even now we question whether we have spoilt them or not given them enough attention. We have at times left them alone when we probably should not have done, but we have taken into account other factors to mitigate the risk and at times we have been careless. We have always left them with childminders and babysitters at many stages of their lives and anything could have happened to them even if we had been asleep in a bedroom nearby.

We do not tick boxes about child rearing/care and nor do we succumb to criticism from others (especially my mother in law). It does not matter if something happens to one of our children and we think we have "covered ourselves in risk mitigation" in order to satisfy those who see themselves as evangelists in child care. The feeling of guilt would be as strong whatever the circumstances of losing a child no matter what the circumstances.

What is worrying is that you don't see it like this. You see it as a set of rules that say if you have not brought your children up according to Churchills law then you do not deserve any sympathy if something happens to your child.

Which is why I say it is not the Mcanns who have a problem in how they rear their kids, it is those who seek to judge them in the cruel manner that people like you do.

The reason I point you to the press and commentators on this subject is because there is no one in the mainstream world of journalism/childcare that subscribes to your heartless view.

You should read other peoples views more before imposing the sanctity of your very narrow experience upon others.

Or I could say **** you and carry on regardless.

You don't have to respond to my threads, you don't have to interfere - but you do. You're drawn like a moth to the flame, you're weak and can't help yourself.

You have to be outraged and what's worse, you have to be seen to be outraged.

[minestrone]

Yeah, I have a child, you don't.

You say you have 3 degrees - and the CERTIFICATES TO PROVE IT!

Small compensation for being too **** ugly to breed with imho.

Carry on carrying on.

What's up? The VC boys blow you out?

Honestly, you have publicly failed to back your commitment to your partner and kid.

That must hurt her.

[DodgyAgent]

Or I could say **** you and carry on regardless.

You don't have to respond to my threads, you don't have to interfere - but you do. You're drawn like a moth to the flame, you're weak and can't help yourself.

You have to be outraged and what's worse, you have to be seen to be outraged.

I am just disappointed and sad that you of all people would hold such a view.

[Churchill]

Honestly, you have publicly failed to back your commitment to your partner and kid.

That must hurt her.

Sorry, I thought you were opening up bets to all comers, I didn't realise that it was just myself you were betting against.

As for the Mrs, I think she'd be more offended if I'd actually taken up a bet with low-life like yourself. She'd worry about the kind of company I was keeping.