That's quite amazing. And painstaking. It's not a technique I knew of (ie, the coloured inks/washes). Like Esse quam says, makes the cut here. : ))
Thanks for sharing such beautiful work.
have only just been able to paint again after a cataract operation in september.
i had complications which meant my short sight has been compromised but following some surgery the fluid buildup seems to have cleared and i have started painting again.
this is a larger rendition of an earlier piece, such a relief to be ble to see the paper again..
That's quite amazing. And painstaking. It's not a technique I knew of (ie, the coloured inks/washes). Like Esse quam says, makes the cut here. : ))
Thanks for sharing such beautiful work.
i am working, more in the planning stages, where i am going to offer a commentary on the caleb and sophia cartoons that the org puts out.
i noticed a heavily patriarchal bent to the narrative that these cartoons offer.
i would really enjoy working with someone who has an academic background in feminist philosophy, or at least someone knowledgeable.
I rest my case.
have only just been able to paint again after a cataract operation in september.
i had complications which meant my short sight has been compromised but following some surgery the fluid buildup seems to have cleared and i have started painting again.
this is a larger rendition of an earlier piece, such a relief to be ble to see the paper again..
That is great news. I can't imagine, this must have been so hard on you.
What beautiful work. Wish I could see it in person.
W/C and acrylic? Or straight watercolour?
i am working, more in the planning stages, where i am going to offer a commentary on the caleb and sophia cartoons that the org puts out.
i noticed a heavily patriarchal bent to the narrative that these cartoons offer.
i would really enjoy working with someone who has an academic background in feminist philosophy, or at least someone knowledgeable.
I noticed a heavily patriarchal bent to the narrative that these cartoons offer
The last time I introduced feminist thought on a thread, one person said "I feel the word patriarchy coming on." You are a man, though (possible an elder or exelder?) , so I am sure the misogynists will not attack you for using the word "partriarchal".
Feminist talk is not welcomed here. If it's mentioned, there are one or two prolific members that I guess, feel the need to be rude and demeaning (showing their ignorance). It's great that you are going to undertake this project - it is sorely needed. I'm sure there are other feminist thinkers reading the topic, and hope one of them will be able to work with you.
Good stuff! Look forward to seeing the results. xx
i've been updating the links at my web site and i'm working on the gtjbrooklyn pages now.
what would you say are the several biggest changesin the jws organization/rules in the last five years or so?
''an Organization that will throw you away and ostracize you forever if you should ever disagree with them''
A hallmark sign of a cult.
repetition for emphasis
saw this on reddit it was posted by user morgan_sparlock .
to me honestly this would of been prohibited 10 years ago, but now every dub is obsessed with this website, it's everywhere even a damn iphone cover... ooh they don't approve of idolatry ooh no they don't accept cross veneration thats bullshit to me!!!
its getting to a point that they are venerating this website (company logo) it's their version of the cross.
Reminds me of a local JW here who had the no blood sign printed on the front window of his car.
When he drove arround the corner a big no blood sign was aproaching you. )):
Gorby, haha, that's cray-cray. Maybe he thought that Jah would protect him from having an accident.
I can't believe this latest move in 'branding'. While surfing JWTalk, I noticed there were a lot of older JWS who are NOT happy with this.
It's been so many years since I left, it's astonishing to see this happen. The JW Org. is, assuredly, brazen! : P
i can't recall the word that describes a group that keeps to itself like the witnesses do.
i thought it was "insular" but i don't think that's the one i'm looking for after reading the definition.
i remember an elder using the word "clannish" and that has the proper definition but it reminds me of a group of elves.
In think "insular" works really well. just my 2 : )
these numbers and letters:--gbr659967--are the only identifying markson this boe..the "informant" who sent it said:.
"this letter came through the congregation inbox and so hasn't got theusual identifying information.
the name of the file is probably thebest way to identify it.
Sugar
They are under investigation in Great Britain re child sexual abuse. A judge has ordered that no documents should be destroyed.
Judicial committees of JWS, have been covering up pedophiles' acts for a LONG time. This thread is about the Society instructing them to destroy forms and/or documents relating to such abuse.
YES, they have an over-inflated sense of their importance in relative terms. In this instance, the destruction of these forms could influence findings of the investigation.
Sure, it means nothing to you. But to JWS, it is very important - maybe 20 or 30 thousand kids being molested and the perpetrators go free is not important on the larger scale.
These are our sisters, mothers, brothers, nephews, etc. We want this secretive, legalistic organization's cover-ups STOPPED.
That is why we pick at anything that could affect hearings like this. Information gets sent to enquiries and judges by people like us - anything to help this cause. xx
this is a pretty good example of the limitations of "bloodless medicine", and why the informed choice should always be "blood conservation" medicine, which retains the safety net of blood transfusion when medically required.
sadly, the watchtower fails to inform jws regarding these important limitations, and their potentially disastrous consequences.. http://www.dailyreportonline.com/id=1202750028414/jury-awards-100k-to-family-of-jehovahs-witness-who-died-after-refusing-blood-transfusion?mcode=0&curindex=0&curpage=3&slreturn=20160118223352.
After looking up a the definition of 'negligent misrepresentation', I can see why the jury awarded this nominal amount.
From the article:
Connor said the plaintiffs contended that Anderson had been bleeding heavily before she underwent surgery, and that much of her blood loss could have been by prevented by taking her to surgery immediately.
“She was clearly bleeding in the emergency room; they commented about their inability to do an intravaginal exam because of her bleeding,” said Connor. “The problem was that the records did not show how much she was losing; part of our complaint was that they weren’t documenting that.”
With its expertise in bloodless medicine, the hospital had an added responsibility to determine how urgently the surgery was needed. Having been in the same situation (waiting for surgery at 7 am for a D&C due to massive bleeding), it's the doctor's responsibility to determine whether the D&C should be done immediately. Nurses constantly monitoring and checking your blood flow (has it gone from gushing to a trickle? Is it stopped?).
It seems to me that is where the negligence would come in. Because they are 'specialists' in bloodless surgery, they should have been aware that she was 'bleeding out' while waiting for her D&C, and performed the surgery on an emergency basis, instead of scheduling the OR and waiting.
Here's the info. on negligent misrepresentation:
url: http://www.nylitguide.com/chapter-pages/fraud-negligent-misrepresentation/
It is well settled that “[a] claim for negligent misrepresentation requires the plaintiff to demonstrate
Mandarin Trading Ltd. v. Wildenstein, 16 N.Y.3d 173, 180 (2011).
“A special relationship may be established by ‘persons who possess unique or specialized expertise, or who are in a special position of confidence and trust with the injured party such that reliance on the negligent misrepresentation is justified.’” Mandarin Trading Ltd. v. Wildenstein, 16 N.Y.3d 173, 180 (2011).
these numbers and letters:--gbr659967--are the only identifying markson this boe..the "informant" who sent it said:.
"this letter came through the congregation inbox and so hasn't got theusual identifying information.
the name of the file is probably thebest way to identify it.
So, per the old form: as well as S-77 Forms, any correspondence about child abuse should be sent in the "special Blue envelope". Always.
Does the new form reference special Blue envelopes for information on congregational child abuse?
hmmm.