NHS Trust Tells Parents To Stop Calling Children’s Body Parts ‘Willy’ And ‘Front Bottom’ And To ‘Tell It Like It Is’

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:56 pm

First topic message reminder :

Parents have been advised not to call children’s body parts nicknames, such as “willy” or “front bottom”, and use the official words instead.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) stated on its website that using a variety of words to refer to the penis or vulva can be “really confusing for children”.

The NHS trust’s sexual health service, Sandyford, is encouraging parents to “tell it like it is and use accurate terms from an early age”.

Jill Wilson, health improvement lead at Sandyford said: “Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words.

“Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’ and ‘leg’.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/children-body-parts-words-advice_uk_5901b563e4b081a5c0fadcc5?utm_hp_ref=uk

Makes perfect sense to me.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:33 pm

As a parent and an educator I find the statistics below both confronting and horrifying. However, they do highlight the reasons WHY we need to teach the children in our care Body Safety from the earliest of years. Such age-appropriate knowledge is empowering for children, and might well be the difference between a child becoming one of these statistics or not.

As an advocate for Body Safety Education in both homes and schools, I have heard many sad and crippling stories from adult survivors; but it’s this one shared comment that stays with me, “If only I had known from the first inappropriate touch it was wrong, my life could have been so different.”

I am not a survivor of childhood sexual abuse but I am a mother and teacher who believes we can do better by our kids. We need to put our adult fear of this topic aside, and take on the responsibility of educating our children so they know to tell, and keep on telling until they are believed. We also have a responsibility to educate ourselves so we know the signs of sexual abuse and grooming. Believing a child when they disclose sexual abuse is of the utmost importance, as is our reaction to the disclosure.

These statistics are a call to action for parents, carers and teachers everywhere — let’s educate ourselves and our kids in Body Safety, and like any good “ripple effect,” let’s educate others to do the same! I am asking you to play your part. Ironically, you may never know but your advocacy could positively change a child’s life forever.

1. Approximately 20 percent of girls (1 in 5) and 8 percent of boys (1 in 12.5) will be sexually abused before their 18th birthday (Pereda et al, 2009)
2. 95 percent of sexually abused children will be abused by someone they know and trust (NAPCAN 2009).
3. Of those molesting a child under six, 50 percent were family members. Family members also accounted for 23 percent of those abusing children 12 to 17 years (Snyder, 2000).
4. The most vulnerable age for children to be exposed to sexual assault is between 3 and 8 years with the majority of onset happening between these ages (Browne & Lynch, 1994).
5. Males made up 90 percent of adult child sexual assault perpetrators, while 3.9 percent of perpetrators were female, with a further 6 percent classified as ’unknown gender’ (McCloskey & Raphael, 2005).
6. As many of 40 percent of children who are sexually abused are abused by older, or more powerful children. (Finkelhor, 2012) Note: with the easy access to pornography we are seeing more and more cases of child on child sexual abuse, and older children/siblings sexually abusing younger children. Twenty-three percent of all 10 to 17 year olds experience exposure to unwanted pornography (Jones L., et al 2012).
7. Eighty-four percent of sexual victimization of children under 12 occurs in a residence (Snyder, 2000).
8. In 98 percent of child abuse cases reported to officials, children’s statements were found to be true (NSW Child Protection Council, cited in Dympna House 1998).
9. 1 in 3 adults would not believe a child if they disclosed sexual abuse ([url=http://www.childhood.org.au/~/media/Files/Research/Research Doing Nothing Hurts Children]Australian Childhood Foundation[/url], 2010).
10. Seventy-three percent of child victims do not tell anyone about the abuse for at least 1 year. Forty-five percent do not tell anyone for 5 years. Some never disclose (Broman-Fulks et al, 2007).
11. Survivors of childhood sexual abuse are 10 to 13 times more likely to attempt suicide. (Plunkett A, O’Toole B, Swanston H, Oates RK, Shrimpton S, Parkinson P 2001).
12. Children living without either parent (foster children) are 10 times more likely to be sexually abused than children who live with both biological parents. Children who live with a single parent that has a live-in partner are at the highest risk: they are 20 times more likely to be victims of sexual abuse than children living with both biological parents (Sedlack et al, 2010).

In my experience, children do not lie about sexual abuse and the research would indicate this. Please educate your child in Body Safety. I truly hope they may never need this knowledge but think of it as a safety belt — just in case.

We also know that children who are being sexually abused may first disclose to a friend. If that friend has been educated in Body Safety they will know to tell a trusted adult on their Safety Network. Educating children in Body Safety is in the best interests of all children.

If these statistics have raised any issues please, go to this links page. For more statistics and general information on child sexual abuse please visit Darkness to Light. To help get sexual abuse prevention education in all schools in the US please support Erin’s Law.

Free My Body Safety Rules poster to download for the children in your life.

Jayneen is the author of children’s books and a parent’s guide on Body Safety.

References
Australian Childhood Foundation (2010). [url=http://www.childhood.org.au/~/media/Files/Research/Research Doing Nothing Hurts Children]Doing Nothing Hurts Children[/url]. Ringwood [Vic]: Australian Childhood Foundation.
Broman-Fulks, J. J., Ruggiero, K. J., Hanson, R. F., Smith, D. W., Resnick, H. S., Kilpatrick, D. G., & Saunders, B. E. (2007). Sexual assault disclosure in relation to adolescent mental health: Results from the National Survey of Adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36: 260 – 266
Browne, K. & Lynch, M. (1994). Prevention: Actions speak louder than words. Child Abuse Review, 3: 241-244.
Fergusson, D. M., & Mullen, P. E. (1999). Childhood sexual abuse: An evidence based perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Finkelhor D. (2012) [url=http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV26_Revised Characteristics of Crimes against Juveniles_5-2-12.pdf]Characteristics of crimes against juveniles[/url], Durham, NH: Crimes Against Children research Centre
Jones L., Mitchell K., Finkelhor D. (2012) Trends in youth victimization: findings from three youth internet safety surveys 2000-2010, Journal of Adolescent Health 50: 179-186
McCloskey KA, Raphael DN. Adult perpetrator gender asymmetries in child sexual assault victim selection: results from the 2000 National Incident-Based Report System. J Child Sex Abus. 2005;14(4):1-24.
New South Wales Child Protection Council, (1998). Managing Sex Offenders
Pereda, Guilera, Forns and Gomez-Benito (2009) The prevalence of child sexual abuse in community and student samples: a meta-analysis
Plunkett A, O’Toole B, Swanston H, Oates RK, Shrimpton S, Parkinson P. Suicide risk following child sexual abuse (2001)
Sedlak, A.J., Mettenburg, J., Basena, M., Petta, I., McPherson, K., Greene, A., and Li, S. (2010). Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4): Report to Congress, Executive Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.
Snyder, H. N. (2000). Sexual assault of young children as reported to law enforcement: Victim, incident, and offender characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Note: Every attempt has been made to locate all references and their links. Due to the nature of this research statistics will vary according to the individual and/or team’s research data.

https://e2epublishing.info/blog/

by Syl Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:42 pm

Thorin wrote:
Syl wrote:

I do think its a bit amusing yes, because I don't think it matters.
Far more serious is the way some people think they can tell other parents how best to bring up their children...when certain things (like what names of body parts to teach a young child) are personal choice.

There is no right or wrong, to bring in a load of rubbish about paedophiles being scared off if a child uses the more adult terminology is a load of crap imo.
If there was any evidence of this I would be interested, till then, I suggest the so called 'expert' thinks of something more worthwhile to try to belittle parents with.

1) So you prove you do not care how in fact this can be beneficial to children. If you think the empowerment of children to protect them from harm is funny and amusing, then what can i say it says about you Syl.

2) Really, there is no right or wrong? How many cases have you dealt with where children have not been believed and can place any valid view point on this or cases that have been dismissed? Do you have any stats on this and how if not it is feasible or not? Or as seen are you simple rubbishing something because you only disagree?

3) How is this belittling parents? What a load of nonsense when its trying to help children and the fact you make this about parents says everything that is wrong with your counters. Again this is not about you, but children.

4) The point still stands and of which nobody has provided a reason not to use the correct terminology

1....Anything that could prevent a child being harmed is important...if by using more adult terminology this would empower a child I would be all for it...I see no evidence it ever has.

2....I am not the one making claims that calling a vagina or a penis by the appropriate name would prevent harm...ask the author to provide the stats not me.

3.....Its belittling parents by telling them their way is wrong.

4......Read the thread...so far everyone has given reasons, just because they don't tally with yours does not make them invisible.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:46 pm

Syl wrote:
Thorin wrote:

1) So you prove you do not care how in fact this can be beneficial to children. If you think the empowerment of children to protect them from harm is funny and amusing, then what can i say it says about you Syl.

2) Really, there is no right or wrong? How many cases have you dealt with where children have not been believed and can place any valid view point on this or cases that have been dismissed? Do you have any stats on this and how if not it is feasible or not? Or as seen are you simple rubbishing something because you only disagree?

3) How is this belittling parents? What a load of nonsense when its trying to help children and the fact you make this about parents says everything that is wrong with your counters. Again this is not about you, but children.

4) The point still stands and of which nobody has provided a reason not to use the correct terminology

1....Anything that could prevent a child being harmed is important...if by using more adult terminology this would empower a child I would be all for it...I see no evidence it ever has.

2....I am not the one making claims that calling a vagina or a penis by the appropriate name would prevent harm...ask the author to provide the stats not me.

3.....Its belittling parents by telling them their way is wrong.

4......Read the thread...so far everyone has given reasons, just because they don't tally with yours does not make them invisible.

1) Yet you have dismissed this outright and claim there is no evidence. Which means you are willing to dismiss this not even researching this.

2) I did provide the stats on child abuse and thus clearly using pet names has failed to prevent child sex abuse.

3) No its not belittling parents, as its showing them a better way to teach children. What next that its wrong to tell a child what a good diet is for them? Is that belittling parents too?

4) I have read their views, so far nobody has offered a view why it would be wrong to use the correct terminology. So its not about being invisible, but nobody has offered a valid reason.

You do understand the difference or what a debate is do you not?

by eddie Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:36 pm

Okay I admit to using "prettier" terms for private parts but as my children get older, I read a lot of children's body part books to them so they get to know what their body parts are called.

The only reason I can see this working is if a paedo was to groom a child then they may use cute terms like "cookie" for example and this would make a child feel like it wasn't such a bad thing - if that makes sense?
So if your chikd knows the correct word for that body part they'd know that the word "cookie" was somehow wrong.

Shit I didn't explain that well but if someone gets it let me know.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:44 pm

eddie wrote:Okay I admit to using "prettier" terms for private parts but as my children get older, I read a lot of children's body part books to them so they get to know what their body parts are called.

The only reason I can see this working is if a paedo was to groom a child then they may use cute terms like "cookie" for example and this would make a child feel like it wasn't such a bad thing - if that makes sense?
So if your chikd knows the correct word for that body part they'd know that the word "cookie" was somehow wrong.

Shit I didn't explain that well but if someone gets it let me know.

I get your points Eddie, but I see many reasons how this can help children, especially about better understanding their own bodies. The point is again I fail to see how or why using any other words is even needed, when we can use the correct terms, of which we already do for other parts.

Again this is not something she has dreamed up about but through speaking to many of the victims.

I think there is much merit to this and is doing away with the continued embarrassment attached to talking about the sexual parts of the body. As seen in the class the boy explained he had an injury to his testicles and it was not laughed at. When we use different names for sexual parts, its as if we are ashamed of talking about them, as if there is something wrong with them and that we should be embarrassed about them. I think that view point is wrong to be honest

by eddie Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:51 pm

I'm finding it hard to disagree with you strangely because I thought I would.

I guess by giving the private body parts pet names you're somehow implying the real names are wrong? And of course, in a medial emergency it's important we all speak the same language.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:54 pm

eddie wrote:I'm finding it hard to disagree with you strangely because I thought I would.

I guess by giving the private body parts pet names you're somehow implying the real names are wrong? And of course, in a medial emergency it's important we all speak the same language.

Thank you Eddie

Night

by HoratioTarr Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:54 pm

eddie wrote:Okay I admit to using "prettier" terms for private parts but as my children get older, I read a lot of children's body part books to them so they get to know what their body parts are called.

The only reason I can see this working is if a paedo was to groom a child then they may use cute terms like "cookie" for example and this would make a child feel like it wasn't such a bad thing - if that makes sense?
So if your chikd knows the correct word for that body part they'd know that the word "cookie" was somehow wrong.

Shit I didn't explain that well but if someone gets it let me know.

I guess the 'prettier' terms are what parents think a child can pronounce more easily. Testicles isn't really something most 2 year olds can say, so it's just easier to use a silly, but easily mimicked name. I also don't think a paedo would care what term was used.

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:56 pm

what a load of bollocks...er...I mean testicles...

see what i did there???

dont we ALL have pet names for nearly EVERYTHING
you refer to that thing under your "cars " bonnet as a motor...yet its PROPER name is an internal combustion engine (the term "motor" being CORRECTLY applied ONLY as a "general" term for something that provides motive power, hence a muscle is also a "motor")

you refer to petrol as "fuel" and technically speaking "petrol" is a "pet name" (since the real name for petrol depends on how good a chemist you are)

you call it "asprin" ...its "proper name" is acetylsalicylic acid

and so on

and are you seriously suggesting that a medic would take a kid more seriously if he said his testicles were hurting , than if he said his balls were painful ???

this strikes me as more lefty conform or be a bad person. "little grey men in little grey boxes" state controlled, indoctrinated, do as you are told, not as you wish, never mind individual freedom nonsense.

for gods sake stop listening to the pseudo science of psychology (which NEVER EVER has conformed to the requirements of the
"scientific method" (and thus qualifies as little more intellectually valid than religion)
and is used as a tool of control (in the same way as religion)

call these "bits" what you will, a rose by any other name and all that.....

AND if the authorities take a less serious view of some child complaining of someone touching his/her (whatever pet name ) THEN THAT IS THE FAILURE OF THAT AUTHORITY not the parents or anyone else

the op is a "cop out" to excuse authorities failure and pathetic weakness/ corruption/political cowardice.

by HoratioTarr Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:01 pm

Lord Foul wrote:what a load of bollocks...er...I mean testicles...

see what i did there???

dont we ALL have pet names for nearly EVERYTHING
you refer to that thing under your "cars " bonnet as a motor...yet its PROPER name is an internal combustion engine (the term "motor" being CORRECTLY applied ONLY as a "general" term for something that provides motive power, hence a muscle is also a "motor")

you refer to petrol as "fuel" and technically speaking "petrol" is a "pet name" (since the real name for petrol depends on how good a chemist you are)

you call it "asprin" ...its "proper name" is acetylsalicylic acid

and so on

and are you seriously suggesting that a medic would take a kid more seriously if he said his testicles were hurting , than if he said his balls were painful ???

this strikes me as more lefty conform or be a bad person. "little grey men in little grey boxes" state controlled, indoctrinated, do as you are told, not as you wish, never mind individual freedom nonsense.

for gods sake stop listening to the pseudo science of psychology (which NEVER EVER has conformed to the requirements of the
"scientific method" (and thus qualifies as little more intellectually valid than religion)
and is used as a tool of control (in the same way as religion)

call these "bits" what you will, a rose by any other name and all that.....

AND if the authorities take a less serious view of some child complaining of someone touching his/her (whatever pet name ) THEN THAT IS THE FAILURE OF THAT AUTHORITY not the parents or anyone else

the op is a "cop out" to excuse authorities failure and pathetic weakness/ corruption/political cowardice.

You got my green vote for that.

by eddie Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:02 pm

I think in the case of schoolchildren it is easier if they all use the same words.
By the same token, I don't think it's a terrible crime if people choose to teach their kids pet names but I've always taught my kids about their bodies from a really young age - the inner and outer.

Recently my daughter choked in school - like badly - they had to slap her back. When they explained why, she knew that it was because "food was stuck in her windpipe" and that it hadn't gone down her "food pipe" because I'd shown her that in a book and taught her. She was less distressed because if this because she knew what had happened. Her teachers were really pleased she understood, it made their job easier.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:02 pm

So you infer a swear word for the testicles and that some how makes your point Victor?

How exactly?

Would you use that word in the hospital?

I very much doubt it.

So your point was absurd to say the least

If he said balls or testicles, I am sure he would understand.

If he said his sausage, would then the doctor understand it was his testicles?

Take your time on that one?

As would not the doctor think it was then his penis?

How about you shut up with your clap trap which as seen was easily rubbished by me, based on your piss poor reasoning.

Again unless you have anything to refute this or show why we should not use the correct words, you are just further proving what a dinosaur you are, clearly extinct

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:04 pm

eddie wrote:I think in the case of schoolchildren it is easier if they all use the same words.
By the same token, I don't think it's a terrible crime if people choose to teach their kids pet names but I've always taught my kids about their bodies from a really young age - the inner and outer.

Recently my daughter choked in school - like badly - they had to slap her back. When they explained why she knew that "food was stuck in her windpipe" and that it hadn't gone down her "food pipe" because I'd shown her that in a book and taught her. She was less distressed because if this because she knew what had happened.

Exactly, its about being uniformed in our terminology.

And unlike Victors daft point on using the swear word bollocks, of which no decent parent would teach their children swear words. This is again about teaching children the terminology of their bodies.

I mean does anyone use pet names for other parts of the body?

No, they only use them for the sexual parts and the reason.

Embarressment

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:08 pm

Thorin wrote:I implore parents and care-givers to use the correct anatomical terms for a child’s genitals.

Mini, cupcake, fireman’s hose, buddy, doughnut, muffin, doodle, wee, butterly, flower, pee-pee, fanny, doo-dad, thingy, peanut, winky, penny-loo, tuppence, doodle, dick, rah, winky-dink, hooha, pooter, sausage, cookie, girls bits, mickey, twah-lah, front bottom, willy...

As an advocate for Body Safety Education both in homes and schools, I implore parents and care-givers to use the correct anatomical terms for a child’s genitals. These terms are: VAGINA, VULVA, BREASTS, BOTTOM, PENIS, TESTICLES.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/8-reasons-not-to-call-your-childs-genitals-pet-names_us_58743186e4b0eb9e49bfbec3?section=us_parents

I mean look at the list of names used.

Again I ask why are they even used?

Are people that embarrassed they cannot refer to the correct names for body parts?

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:23 pm

Thorin wrote:So you infer a swear word for the testicles and that some how makes your point Victor?

How exactly?

Would you use that word in the hospital?

I, personally wouldnt...but then I have spent a lot of time in my younger days stdying biology (as part of life sciences, and know my anatomy and physiology very well, but I do know of individuals to whom those dangling bits are indded bollocks...or nuts or whatever...so what...should a doctor be offended??? I rather think not> stop being such a psedo intellectual and accept that there ARE uneducated or EVEN differently educated folks out there in the world...
PRECISIONISTS...Drs, scirntists of all kinds, engineers, use "precision language" everyone else uses the venacular....and even precisionists in one field, may well use the venacular if discussing something outwith their field.

I very much doubt it.

So your point was absurd to say the least

If he said balls or testicles, I am sure he would understand.

If he said his sausage, would then the doctor understand it was his testicles?

dont be a pillock...EVERYONE knows a boys sausage is his willy

Take your time on that one?

As would not the doctor think it was then his penis?

How about you shut up with your clap trap which as seen was easily rubbished by me, based on your piss poor reasoning.

Again unless you have anything to refute this or show why we should not use the correct words, you are just further proving what a dinosaur you are, clearly extinct

hows about you shut yer beak and stop spouting sentitious garbage
and as shown you rubbished nothing, whilst the venacular tends to be more diffuse than precisionist grade english, it still has its own well understood pattern and rules...
and moreover such venacular is quickly established (especially nowadays) by useage, even IF the origins are often obtuse.
( I havnt a clue why its a "pussy", beyond the fact that its furry and likes being stroked..but 99.99% of the english speaking world knows that its NOT just the name for a fur coated quadruped)
more to the point its often, though not generally , "descriptive"... so "sausage" aint going to be applied to "nuts" ...is it...
moreover...the venacualr is well established in anycase, and generally only changes significantly over a couple of generations. though as said earlier changes (and especially additions) can establish themselves quite rapidly.

by Miffs2 Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:25 pm

Thorin wrote:

Parents have been advised not to call children’s body parts nicknames, such as “willy” or “front bottom”, and use the official words instead.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) stated on its website that using a variety of words to refer to the penis or vulva can be “really confusing for children”.

The NHS trust’s sexual health service, Sandyford, is encouraging parents to “tell it like it is and use accurate terms from an early age”.

Jill Wilson, health improvement lead at Sandyford said: “Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words.

“Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’ and ‘leg’.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/children-body-parts-words-advice_uk_5901b563e4b081a5c0fadcc5?utm_hp_ref=uk

Makes perfect sense to me.

What a load of old fanny Razz

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:30 pm

Lord Foul wrote:

I, personally wouldnt...but then I have spent a lot of time in my younger days stdying biology (as part of life sciences, and know my anatomy and physiology very well, but I do know of individuals to whom those dangling bits are indded bollocks...or nuts or whatever...so what...should a doctor be offended??? I rather think not> stop being such a psedo intellectual and accept that there ARE uneducated or EVEN differently educated folks out there in the world...
PRECISIONISTS...Drs, scirntists of all kinds, engineers, use "precision language" everyone else uses the venacular....and even precisionists in one field, may well use the venacular if discussing something outwith their field.
dont be a pillock...EVERYONE knows a boys sausage is his willy

hows about you shut yer beak and stop spouting sentitious garbage
and as shown you rubbished nothing, whilst the venacular tends to be more diffuse than precisionist grade english, it still has its own well understood pattern and rules...
and moreover such venacular is quickly established (especially nowadays) by useage, even IF the origins are often obtuse.
( I havnt a clue why its a "pussy", beyond the fact that its furry and likes being stroked..but 99.99% of the english speaking world knows that its NOT just the name for a fur coated quadruped)
more to the point its often, though not generally , "descriptive"... so "sausage" aint going to be applied to "nuts" ...is it...
moreover...the venacualr is well established in anycase, and generally only changes significantly over a couple of generations. though as said earlier changes (and especially additions) can establish themselves quite rapidly.

What an insufferable amount of pure inane drivel

So in your study of biology, was ever the sexual body parts ever refereed to as muffin, sausage, or cookie?

So if the boy had problems with his testicles and only knows one word for the area as sausage, then the doctor is going to be looking in the wrong area dummy

So after more inane points what did you fail to do

Show why we should not use the correct terminology?

Again I ask and why we should not teach uniformity in termology?

Why is it we refer correctly to other body parts when we teach and yet make up daft ones for the sexual parts of the human body?

Again you cannot answer

You then go off more clap trap, invoke left wing, which has nothing to do with this and even worse have failed to even have studied and spoken to the collective views of countless child abuse victims

So how the fuck can you know what the fuck you are talking about?

Don't you think she has seen patterns here in the abuse?

Or has that slipped that feeble mind of yours?

All you did was see red by not reading something with an open mind.

You just jumped in with your usual anger trash and failed to offer a single valid reason

Now last chance dumb ass

Please explain to me why we should not use the correct terminology for sexual parts?

Second show to me how not using the correct terms cannot help aid against child abuse with facts

Last chance

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:33 pm

I recon I know what lies at the bottom of this

the "powers that be" have decided that all you poor "normal" english speakers will have to give up your use of venacualr and become experts in the precisionist grade english of a dozen vital services....

BECAUSE THESE SERVICES are being stuffed full to the brim with non/poor english speaking specialists

go to a hospital today and say your nuts are aching and the foreign doctor on duty is going to be somewhat baffled, since you are not a tree.....
so instead of insisting on a super knowlege of english from these specialists...YOU are going to have to learn to speak the "specialist language"

its like the poor chap that went to B&Q and asked for a plank of wood with groves in it,
It was only after he'd laid out cold the assistant who came to help him, that he realised that the assistant wasnt threatening him when he said he needed decking...

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:34 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I recon I know what lies at the bottom of this

the "powers that be" have decided that all you poor "normal" english speakers will have to give up your use of venacualr and become experts in the precisionist grade english of a dozen vital services....

BECAUSE THESE SERVICES are being stuffed full to the brim with non/poor english speaking specialists

go to a hospital today and say your nuts are aching and the foreign doctor on duty is going to be somewhat baffled, since you are not a tree.....
so instead of insisting on a super knowlege of english from these specialists...YOU are going to have to learn to speak the "specialist language"

its like the poor chap that went to B&Q and asked for a plank of wood with groves in it,
It was only after he'd laid out cold the assistant who came to help him, that he realised that the assistant wasnt threatening him when he said he needed decking...

NO that is just your paranoia

again

What an insufferable amount of pure inane drivel

So in your study of biology, was ever the sexual body parts ever refereed to as muffin, sausage, or cookie?

So if the boy had problems with his testicles and only knows one word for the area as sausage, then the doctor is going to be looking in the wrong area dummy

So after more inane points what did you fail to do

Show why we should not use the correct terminology?

Again I ask and why we should not teach uniformity in termology?

Why is it we refer correctly to other body parts when we teach and yet make up daft ones for the sexual parts of the human body?

Again you cannot answer

You then go off more clap trap, invoke left wing, which has nothing to do with this and even worse have failed to even have studied and spoken to the collective views of countless child abuse victims

So how the fuck can you know what the fuck you are talking about?

Don't you think she has seen patterns here in the abuse?

Or has that slipped that feeble mind of yours?

All you did was see red by not reading something with an open mind.

You just jumped in with your usual anger trash and failed to offer a single valid reason

Now last chance dumb ass

Please explain to me why we should not use the correct terminology for sexual parts?

Second show to me how not using the correct terms cannot help aid against child abuse with facts

Last chance

by Miffs2 Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:38 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I recon I know what lies at the bottom of this

the "powers that be" have decided that all you poor "normal" english speakers will have to give up your use of venacualr and become experts in the precisionist grade english of a dozen vital services....

BECAUSE THESE SERVICES are being stuffed full to the brim with non/poor english speaking specialists

go to a hospital today and say your nuts are aching and the foreign doctor on duty is going to be somewhat baffled, since you are not a tree.....
so instead of insisting on a super knowlege of english from these specialists...YOU are going to have to learn to speak the "specialist language"

its like the poor chap that went to B&Q and asked for a plank of wood with groves in it,
It was only after he'd laid out cold the assistant who came to help him, that he realised that the assistant wasnt threatening him when he said he needed decking...

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:39 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:I recon I know what lies at the bottom of this

the "powers that be" have decided that all you poor "normal" english speakers will have to give up your use of venacualr and become experts in the precisionist grade english of a dozen vital services....

BECAUSE THESE SERVICES are being stuffed full to the brim with non/poor english speaking specialists

go to a hospital today and say your nuts are aching and the foreign doctor on duty is going to be somewhat baffled, since you are not a tree.....
so instead of insisting on a super knowlege of english from these specialists...YOU are going to have to learn to speak the "specialist language"

its like the poor chap that went to B&Q and asked for a plank of wood with groves in it,
It was only after he'd laid out cold the assistant who came to help him, that he realised that the assistant wasnt threatening him when he said he needed decking...

Well unless he is insulting the Scottish as poor English speakers

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:40 pm

Thorin wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

I, personally wouldnt...but then I have spent a lot of time in my younger days stdying biology (as part of life sciences, and know my anatomy and physiology very well, but I do know of individuals to whom those dangling bits are indded bollocks...or nuts or whatever...so what...should a doctor be offended??? I rather think not> stop being such a psedo intellectual and accept that there ARE uneducated or EVEN differently educated folks out there in the world...
PRECISIONISTS...Drs, scirntists of all kinds, engineers, use "precision language" everyone else uses the venacular....and even precisionists in one field, may well use the venacular if discussing something outwith their field.
dont be a pillock...EVERYONE knows a boys sausage is his willy

hows about you shut yer beak and stop spouting sentitious garbage
and as shown you rubbished nothing, whilst the venacular tends to be more diffuse than precisionist grade english, it still has its own well understood pattern and rules...
and moreover such venacular is quickly established (especially nowadays) by useage, even IF the origins are often obtuse.
( I havnt a clue why its a "pussy", beyond the fact that its furry and likes being stroked..but 99.99% of the english speaking world knows that its NOT just the name for a fur coated quadruped)
more to the point its often, though not generally , "descriptive"... so "sausage" aint going to be applied to "nuts" ...is it...
moreover...the venacualr is well established in anycase, and generally only changes significantly over a couple of generations. though as said earlier changes (and especially additions) can establish themselves quite rapidly.

What an insufferable amount of pure inane drivel

So in your study of biology, was ever the sexual body parts ever refereed to as muffin, sausage, or cookie?

So if the boy had problems with his testicles and only knows one word for the area as sausage, then the doctor is going to be looking in the wrong area dummy

So after more inane points what did you fail to do

Show why we should not use the correct terminology?

Again I ask and why we should not teach uniformity in termology?

Why is it we refer correctly to other body parts when we teach and yet make up daft ones for the sexual parts of the human body?

Again you cannot answer

You then go off more clap trap, invoke left wing, which has nothing to do with this and even worse have failed to even have studied and spoken to the collective views of countless child abuse victims

So how the fuck can you know what the fuck you are talking about?

Don't you think she has seen patterns here in the abuse?

Or has that slipped that feeble mind of yours?

All you did was see red by not reading something with an open mind.

You just jumped in with your usual anger trash and failed to offer a single valid reason

Now last chance dumb ass

Please explain to me why we should not use the correct terminology for sexual parts?

Second show to me how not using the correct terms cannot help aid against child abuse with facts

Last chance

for that didge...fuck off you over bearing, sentitious puffed up, over inflated , wombat

you dont issue ANY "chances"...who the fuck do you think you are...

full of agressive rhetoric, waffle bluster and bluff. you have the knowlege of fruit fly and the sense of flatworm

nothing of the above post is even relevant (and if you dont know why that proves my point, but to help you ...I SERIOUSLY doubt ANYONE, EVER, taught their son that "sausage" applied to the "whole area) your knowlege of how language develops and is used is woefully inadequate and incomplete and so are the conclusions you draw

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:43 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

What an insufferable amount of pure inane drivel

So in your study of biology, was ever the sexual body parts ever refereed to as muffin, sausage, or cookie?

So if the boy had problems with his testicles and only knows one word for the area as sausage, then the doctor is going to be looking in the wrong area dummy

So after more inane points what did you fail to do

Show why we should not use the correct terminology?

Again I ask and why we should not teach uniformity in termology?

Why is it we refer correctly to other body parts when we teach and yet make up daft ones for the sexual parts of the human body?

Again you cannot answer

You then go off more clap trap, invoke left wing, which has nothing to do with this and even worse have failed to even have studied and spoken to the collective views of countless child abuse victims

So how the fuck can you know what the fuck you are talking about?

Don't you think she has seen patterns here in the abuse?

Or has that slipped that feeble mind of yours?

All you did was see red by not reading something with an open mind.

You just jumped in with your usual anger trash and failed to offer a single valid reason

Now last chance dumb ass

Please explain to me why we should not use the correct terminology for sexual parts?

Second show to me how not using the correct terms cannot help aid against child abuse with facts

Last chance

for that didge...fuck off you over bearing, sentitious puffed up, over inflated , wombat

you dont issue ANY "chances"...who the fuck do you think you are...

full of agressive rhetoric, waffle bluster and bluff. you have the knowlege of fruit fly and the sense of flatworm

nothing of the above post is even relevant (and if you dont know why that proves my point, but to help you ...I SERIOUSLY doubt ANYONE, EVER, taught their son that "sausage" applied to the "whole area) your knowlege of how language develops and is used is woefully inadequate and incomplete and so are the conclusions you draw

You had your last chance

I gave you two very straight forward and simple questions to answer

You failed with yet more inane drivel

Like I said, you remain in the dinosaur age

If we can teach a child that their shoulder is their shoulder. I fail to see why we cannot teach then that their penis, is their penis.

Its just sheer embarrassment for parents to make up words to sexual parts, because they are basically saying something is wrong with those words to have used.

So jog along little boy

by Miffs2 Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:48 pm

Thorin wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

for that didge...fuck off you over bearing, sentitious puffed up, over inflated , wombat

you dont issue ANY "chances"...who the fuck do you think you are...

full of agressive rhetoric, waffle bluster and bluff. you have the knowlege of fruit fly and the sense of flatworm

nothing of the above post is even relevant (and if you dont know why that proves my point, but to help you ...I SERIOUSLY doubt ANYONE, EVER, taught their son that "sausage" applied to the "whole area) your knowlege of how language develops and is used is woefully inadequate and incomplete and so are the conclusions you draw

You had your last chance

I gave you two very straight forward and simple questions to answer

You failed with yet more inane drivel

Like I said, you remain in the dinosaur age

If we can teach a child that their shoulder is their shoulder. I fail to see why we cannot teach then that their penis, is their penis.

Its just sheer embarrassment for parents to make up words to sexual parts, because they are basically saying something is wrong with those words to have used.

So jog along little boy

Uncalled for rudeness there Thorin
Leave the parenting to the experts, the parents

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:51 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Thorin wrote:

You had your last chance

I gave you two very straight forward and simple questions to answer

You failed with yet more inane drivel

Like I said, you remain in the dinosaur age

If we can teach a child that their shoulder is their shoulder. I fail to see why we cannot teach then that their penis, is their penis.

Its just sheer embarrassment for parents to make up words to sexual parts, because they are basically saying something is wrong with those words to have used.

So jog along little boy

Uncalled for rudeness there Thorin
Leave the parenting to the experts, the parents

So we should leave food diets to parents?

Is that why we looked to ensure children have the correct diets at school now?

Sometimes parents cannot make the right or correct decisions

Though my point is not on enforcement here, but education, that parents learn to use the correct terminology

So this is about education

P.s what about Lord Fouls rudeness, or does he get a free pass?

Don;t bother answering that, its clear you only see what you want to see Nems

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:53 pm

So....

in that case I assume you are going to start refering to your leg as "crus"
your shoulder as humero

I assume you tell your dr you have a pain in your cranium

you know the french have it

you are "mal EN lat tete"

rather than "mal a la tete"

oh dear...the world is about to fall in...i've had my "last chance"

will the serpent of the deep come in get me?

will satan reach up and grab me ankle?

aaghhhhhh

PRAT.

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:55 pm

Thorin wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:
Thorin wrote:

You had your last chance

I gave you two very straight forward and simple questions to answer

You failed with yet more inane drivel

Like I said, you remain in the dinosaur age

If we can teach a child that their shoulder is their shoulder. I fail to see why we cannot teach then that their penis, is their penis.

Its just sheer embarrassment for parents to make up words to sexual parts, because they are basically saying something is wrong with those words to have used.

So jog along little boy

Uncalled for rudeness there Thorin
Leave the parenting to the experts, the parents

So we should leave food diets to parents?

Is that why we looked to ensure children have the correct diets at school now?

Sometimes parents cannot make the right or correct decisions

Though my point is not on enforcement here, but education, that parents learn to use the correct terminology

So this is about education

P.s what about Lord Fouls rudeness, or does he get a free pass?

Don;t bother answering that, its clear you only see what you want to see Nems

considering I was only rude to YOU in RETURN....(else point out where I was rude to YOU first)
I'd shut it on that if I were you....

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:57 pm

Lord Foul wrote:So....

in that case I assume you are going to start refering to your leg as "crus"
your shoulder as humero

I assume you tell your dr you have a pain in your cranium

you know the french have it

you are "mal EN lat tete"

rather than "mal a la tete"

oh dear...the world is about to fall in...i've had my "last chance"

will the serpent of the deep come in get me?

will satan reach up and grab me ankle?

aaghhhhhh

PRAT.

No we use the layman terms in physiology, that all people understand.

Not the medical terms, that medical staff would use

Do you understand the difference and how we use uniform terminology

The only twat is someone who has so far failed to provide any valid reason why we should not use the correct terminology, when we do so for every other body part with children.

That you and everyone else (except Eddie) has failed to do.

I mean why are you so anti-education?

Nems claims the parents are now experts at physiology?

Since when?

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:57 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

So we should leave food diets to parents?

Is that why we looked to ensure children have the correct diets at school now?

Sometimes parents cannot make the right or correct decisions

Though my point is not on enforcement here, but education, that parents learn to use the correct terminology

So this is about education

P.s what about Lord Fouls rudeness, or does he get a free pass?

Don;t bother answering that, its clear you only see what you want to see Nems

considering I was only rude to YOU in RETURN....(else point out where I was rude to YOU first)
I'd shut it on that if I were you....

And that makes it okay does it?

To wrongs don;t make a right

That includes my abuse being wrong

I dont make excuses as you do though

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:59 pm

Also I dont bow down to threat. What are you going to do, abuse your position now, because you don;t like being wrong here?

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:00 pm

you are just sore becasue I insulted your precious psychobabble and you know you cant defend it.... Laughing

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:01 pm

Lord Foul wrote:you are just sore becasue I insulted your precious psychobabble and you know you cant defend it....

Why would i be sore about your views?

As seen you gave an opinion not based on facts and mainly based off paranoia

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:02 pm

Thorin wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

So we should leave food diets to parents?

Is that why we looked to ensure children have the correct diets at school now?

Sometimes parents cannot make the right or correct decisions

Though my point is not on enforcement here, but education, that parents learn to use the correct terminology

So this is about education

P.s what about Lord Fouls rudeness, or does he get a free pass?

Don;t bother answering that, its clear you only see what you want to see Nems

considering I was only rude to YOU in RETURN....(else point out where I was rude to YOU first)
I'd shut it on that if I were you....

And that makes it okay does it?

To wrongs don;t make a right

That includes my abuse being wrong

I dont make excuses as you do though

read the rules...some retaliation is allowed and expected...

you havnt the sense of a zabriskan fonteema

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:03 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

And that makes it okay does it?

To wrongs don;t make a right

That includes my abuse being wrong

I dont make excuses as you do though

read the rules...some retaliation is allowed and expected...

you havnt the sense of a zabriskan fonteema

Show me the rules I have broken?

The Rules:
NewsFix was created to be a place where people of different backgrounds and beliefs can debate current events and have fun.
Rule violation may be punished by banning or basementing (rendering the user's account inactive for a time).
Membership implies an agreement to abide by these rules:
Part 1: Ban-worthy infractions
Users who dox (disclose personal information about) other members or their families or friends will be permanently banned.
Users who engage in a pattern of repeated, malicious site disruption, or who work to get the site shut down, will be permanently banned.
Users who repeatedly engage in hate speech or "gang activity" (see below) may be permanently banned.
Part 2: Basement-worthy infractions
"Gang activity" -- any members conspiring to get other members banned or otherwise punished will be basemented (rendered inactive) for a term subject to moderator discretion.
"Hate speech" -- any member using words or imagery to intentionally and maliciously denigrate people of different races, nationalities, sexual orientations, religious or other beliefs, etc. will be basemented for a term subject to moderator discretion.
"Site disruption" -- any member engaging in conduct which moderators deem a significant disruption will be warned or basemented. This includes excessively making personal insults, excessively turning threads into flame wars, creating threads intended to antagonize other members, and other anti-social behaviors.
Part 3: The role of the moderators
All moderators are trusted by the site founder (Ben Reilly) to fairly enforce the rules, independent of oversight.
Members who repeatedly question the judgment of moderators may be deemed disruptive and subjected to basementing.
Members who feel they have been unfairly punished have the right to appeal their punishment to the site founder, either by e-mailing newsfixmod@gmail.com or a private message to the site founder.
Objectionable content should always be reported to one or more moderators. Moderators don't see all content at the moment it was posted. The presence of objectionable content should NOT be construed as tacit moderator approval of said content.
Moderators are in no way obliged to inform or explain to the rest of the community any member's punishment.

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:05 pm

Thorin wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:you are just sore becasue I insulted your precious psychobabble and you know you cant defend it....

Why would i be sore about your views?

As seen you gave an opinion not based on facts and mainly based off paranoia

my views on psychology are correct and accurate...

It is NOT a science....

It does not and never has been able to accord with the scientific principles..which reduces it to an "art" and little better than religion.

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:06 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Why would i be sore about your views?

As seen you gave an opinion not based on facts and mainly based off paranoia

my views on psychology are correct and accurate...

It is NOT a science....

It does not and never has been able to accord with the scientific principles..which reduces it to an "art" and little better than religion.

NHS Trust Tells Parents To Stop Calling Children’s Body Parts ‘Willy’ And ‘Front Bottom’ And To ‘Tell It Like It Is’ - Page 2 Giphy

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:07 pm

ok ...does "psychology" conform to the "scientific priciples"

answer that

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:08 pm

Lord Foul wrote:ok ...does "psychology" conform to the "scientific priciples"

answer that

No it does not, so how can then your views on it be correct and accurate?

Take your time

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:11 pm

so it does not conform to the scientific principles..

especially, not one part of it is repeatable 100%

therfore it is NOT a science..

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:12 pm

Lord Foul wrote:so it does not conform to the scientific principles..

especially, not one part of it is repeatable 100%

therfore it is NOT a science..

Nobody claimed it was a science

So you avoided how then you would be accurate on and correct on many claims?

By invoking this?

Razz

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:13 pm

if it is not a science....what is it

I doubt it can be classified as a "humanity" like history. geography etc
its best fit is an "art"

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:16 pm

Lord Foul wrote:if it is not a science....what is it

I doubt it can be classified as a "humanity" like history. geography etc
its best fit is an "art"

Its an attempt at understanding.

Of which there is plenty of empirical evidence.

Now its just making me laugh all you can do is further misdirect by trying to dish the subject

Its like 5 year old playground trash talk, which does sum up your mentality really

So again how does that make not teaching the correct terminology to children right to you?

When we teach the majority of parts correctly already?

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:26 pm

Well its late and I have to be up early.

Night Lord Grumpy

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:30 pm

I'm accurate on most of what I say, simply becasue there is nothing wrong with the "common masses" using the venacular. The failure of the precisionist to understand such venacular is the fault of that precisionist..not the otherway round.

I wouldnt expect someone to come to me and describe in clear cogent precisionist terms what they wanted me to build them if they came and asked me to make them say an arduino controlled automatic climate control for a green house.. If they did I would wonder why they wanted me to make it. since clearly they must know enough to do it them selves???(not that that would stop me doing it of course, but I would wonder)

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:36 pm

Thorin wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:if it is not a science....what is it

I doubt it can be classified as a "humanity" like history. geography etc
its best fit is an "art"

Its an attempt at understanding.

Of which there is plenty of empirical evidence.

Now its just making me laugh all you can do is further misdirect by trying to dish the subject

Its like 5 year old playground trash talk, which does sum up your mentality really

So again how does that make not teaching the correct terminology to children right to you?

When we teach the majority of parts correctly already?

empirical evidence is no evidence
one might just as well consider the "empirical evdence" of religious miracles" occuring, or the empirical evidence of the "ghost hunter"
to be valid.
Rolling Eyes

besides...we must not lose these venacular terms

I mean

remove your cranium from your anus and stop being a penis

just doesnt cut it in the same way as

get your head outta your arse and stop being a dick

Laughing

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:37 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I'm accurate on most of what I say, simply becasue there is nothing wrong with the "common masses" using the venacular. The failure of the precisionist to understand such venacular is the fault of that precisionist..not the otherway round.

I wouldnt expect someone to come to me and describe in clear cogent precisionist terms what they wanted me to build them if they came and asked me to make them say an arduino controlled automatic climate control for a green house.. If they did I would wonder why they wanted me to make it. since clearly they must know enough to do it them selves???(not that that would stop me doing it of course, but I would wonder)

So the best you can come up with is that you see nothing wrong with parents doing so.

Wow

That does not answer why they should not use the correct terminology, when they already do so with countless other body parts

Its not difficult words we are talking about here either, which have two syllables at most like many other body parts taught to children.

So you are again offering no reason as to not use them.

I told you, the only reason is based upon age old taboo's around teaching children words, which people class as clearly rude for children to use. Which is absurd.

Its down to embarrassment over the words, as to why many parents do not use them.

The fact we have progressed on so many other issues, its time people put away their prudish views around the sexual body parts.

So if there is nothing wrong as you claim using vernacular, then there clearly is nothing wrong with them using the correct terminology.

Goodnight

by Guest Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:40 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Its an attempt at understanding.

Of which there is plenty of empirical evidence.

Now its just making me laugh all you can do is further misdirect by trying to dish the subject

Its like 5 year old playground trash talk, which does sum up your mentality really

So again how does that make not teaching the correct terminology to children right to you?

When we teach the majority of parts correctly already?

empirical evidence is no evidence
one might just as well consider the "empirical evdence" of religious miracles" occuring, or the empirical evidence of the "ghost hunter"
to be valid.

besides...we must not lose these venacular terms

I mean

remove your cranium from your anus and stop being a penis

just doesnt cut it in the same way as

get your head outta your arse and stop being a dick

To help you understand

https://www.simplypsychology.org/science-psychology.html

get your cranium outta your anus and stop being a penis

Works just as fine

It helps if you dont cheat as you attempted to do, by changing the actual wording

Right, I have to go grumpy, but as seen, I dont think psychology is a science and take the later views in the link, but it certainly uses many scientific methods

Hence why you have much to learn

Night Grumpy

by Ben Reilly Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:46 pm

You know, medical professionals in the U.S. recommend the exact same thing, and our hospitals aren't teeming with unwashed foreigners.

Anyway, I just wanted an excuse to drop this here:

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:58 pm

what a dismal, colourless world you envisage...

I mean...the same principle can be applied to EVERYTHING

every expression , be it word, picture, form, or thought can be shoehorned into "only the correct and acceptable form"

like I said the little grey men in little grey boxes scenario....with no room for individulaistic terms and expression....

you start by asking "why all these terms" use only the correct ones"
and end up with you can only buy this one (orthopedically) correct shoe in this one set colour and style...there is no NEED for any other

and so on....

by Syl Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:10 am

The argument that a medic would be confused if the wrong terminology was used is ridiculous.
They always ask you to point to the area anyway, to counteract any possible confusion.

by Sponsored content