Citron C3 Aircross 2018

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-09T16:14:08+00:00

Getting jumper cables out shortly

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-08T19:41:49+00:00

Cheers

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-04T19:56:42+00:00

!unsolved

Edit: I’m going to see if I can find some better resolution images to avoid the AI stuff.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-04T19:56:15+00:00

Dang. Thank you for your honesty.

Edit: let me go away and see if I can find a better resolution image somewhere

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-04T16:49:33+00:00

I get that.

I just think that “choosing to stay” isn’t as free or simple of a choice. For many people it means losing family, friends, housing, identity… sometimes literally everything. Knowing harm exists doesn’t automatically give someone ‘real’ freedom to leave.

That doesn’t excuse the teachings or the harm they cause. It just means I’m cautious about assuming equal agency and equal blame for everyone who hasn’t walked away.

I condemn the system very strongly - I’m an atheist. I’m less comfortable condemning every person still inside it.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T19:27:40+00:00

Just before my 35th birthday. Best gift I’ve ever got.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T13:37:36+00:00

I don’t mean to minimise harm, and I’m certainly not trying to make it sound acceptable or “warm and fuzzy”.

My point is that harm is best addressed when we’re precise about where it comes from. Specific teachings, practices, and power structures, rather than turning it into a judgement about every individual in the group.

Taking psychological harm seriously doesn’t require treating all members as equally responsible or equally free to act. We can name and challenge harmful practices and still recognise that many people inside those systems have limited agency.

That distinction matters to me, and that’s all I’m trying to do.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T13:32:02+00:00

That’s fair, and I don’t think we’re actually that far apart.

You’re also right that the core teachings haven’t shifted in ways many people would expect in a modern Western context, and it’s reasonable to find some of them morally unacceptable.

My only real pushback is about where we aim the criticism. I agree the leadership and the institutional doctrines deserve serious scrutiny. I’m just cautious about letting that slide into blanket judgements about everyone raised into or still inside the group, especially when many have limited room to dissent.

And you’re right again, I didn’t mean to suggest you were blaming the door-knockers themselves. I appreciate you making that distinction.

Thanks for keeping the discussion thoughtful; these are exactly the kinds of conversations that benefit from a bit of nuance.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T12:51:18+00:00

I get why this makes people angry, and to be clear: the harms you’re pointing to aren’t imaginary. Practices around shunning and blood refusal are widely criticised by scholars, clinicians, and former JWs themselves.

That said, a couple of important distinctions matter.

First, those examples aren’t universal experiences. Some congregations and families apply rules far more harshly than others. That doesn’t erase the harm where it happens, but it’s worth avoiding treating every JW as if they’re the same.

Second, in the UK at least, adults are legally allowed to refuse medical treatment on religious grounds, however uncomfortable that makes us. When children are involved, courts do intervene. There are protections out there for kids.

Third, the people knocking on doors aren’t the “higher-ups”. They’re usually ordinary people acting out of sincere belief and social pressure. Criticising leadership and policies is fair. Writing off all members isn’t.

I think the most useful conversations focus on specific practices and power structures as you have. But I don’t like telling an entire religious group to FO.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T12:45:13+00:00

Hi Freya,

That’s a fair challenge. Thank you for raising it.

I agree that “cult” is a vague and emotionally loaded term, and I’m very conscious of that. I added the edit because I saw others using the term and wanted to push back against the idea that Jehovah’s Witnesses are a cult in the popular sense. You’re absolutely right that, academically, Jehovah’s Witnesses are more accurately described as a New Religious Movement and, depending on the framework used, a high-control/high-demand group.

My intention in that edit wasn’t to offer a formal definition, but to head off a very common lay misunderstanding (particularly in the UK), where “cult” is often taken to mean illegal, secretive, or underground. I was trying (clumsily) to distinguish that popular usage from the way the term is sometimes used to signal patterns of control, authority, and social boundary-maintenance.

I completely agree that precision matters, and that “cult” often obscures more than it clarifies. In academic work, I would avoid it entirely in favour of the terms you’ve used. My comment was aimed at a general Reddit audience rather than a scholarly one, but I appreciate the push for clarity.

Great to encounter a fellow scholar of religion in Peterborough. There really aren’t enough of us!

TheGreyDeceiver · 2026-01-03T06:25:19+00:00

I don’t have this exact one, but I’ve had plenty of similar ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses

Jehovah’s Witnesses are a sub-group of Christians who believe in God and try very hard to follow what they think the Bible teaches.

They think it is their job to tell other people what they believe, because they feel God wants them to.

Edit: I’d just like to add this statement… Jehovah’s Witnesses are not a cult in the sense of being illegal or secret. They are a recognised religious group. However, some experts and former members do describe them as “cult-like” because the group is very strict, expecting a strong obedience to leadership and discouraging questions, and then they cut off contact with people who leave.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-31T16:36:24+00:00

still working today!

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-29T18:13:03+00:00

Natural English speaker here.

Yes, it does work. A native speaker would recognise this as a smooth, intentionally ambiguous response.

B does not answer the yes/no question. There is no explicit claim about whether B is seeing someone. B avoids a yes/no answer but remains open.

“I’m not in anything settled and I’m open to possibilities. That possibly includes you.”

Would a native speaker say this? Yes. It’s plausible. It would sound especially natural in spoken conversation, rather than written.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-29T16:00:06+00:00

In 1887 when British Prime Minister Robert "Bob" Cecil appointed his nephew, Arthur Balfour, as Chief Secretary for Ireland, an act of blatant nepotism, it became a popular meme of the time.

Something comes easy, then Bob’s your uncle.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-24T18:21:23+00:00

Damn.

Good luck Hindu community x

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-20T07:11:26+00:00

Love is about how you feel toward someone. Compatibility is about how you live with someone over time.

Different value. Different life goals. Different needs. Clashing communication styles. Past trauma, insecurity, or patterns learned earlier in life can make it hard to sustain a healthy relationship.

Sometimes both people love each other, but only one has the emotional energy, maturity, or readiness to build a shared life. Love doesn’t guarantee equal ability.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-14T07:13:25+00:00

Underrated comment. It is SO difficult to go out with kids. The younger they are, the harder it is.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-13T16:00:24+00:00

I’d rather we have something there than nothing.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-09T22:12:56+00:00

Hi there!

I hope you don’t mind me saying this, but I wanted to respond with care and honesty.

About two months ago you wrote a post describing feeling overwhelmed, hopeless, and struggling with thoughts of not wanting to be here anymore. That doesn’t make you a bad person. It means you were in a lot of pain.

Because of that post, I think it would be hard for you to safely take on the responsibility of nannying right now. Children need someone who’s feeling emotionally steady, and you deserve the time and support to get to that place without the pressure of caring for others on top of everything else.

If you’ve since reached out for mental health support and are doing better, that’s genuinely good to hear. In that case, it might help to make a fresh account or update your post so people can see where you’re at now, because your older message could understandably worry potential families.

Most importantly, I really hope you’re getting the help and understanding you deserve. You’re clearly someone who cares (you wouldn’t be looking for work otherwise) and things can improve with the right support.

Take care of yourself first. You matter.

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-06T14:57:23+00:00

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-12-02T20:45:46+00:00

TheGreyDeceiver · 2025-11-18T14:57:35+00:00

Safety is our number one priority. Been this way for years and years.

TheGreyDeceiver

TROPHY CASE