Loz

Because hipster/yummy mummy/city gent types never, ever get a hard time around here...

It's religious?

At last, some balance for all the YM/MILF rage.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > blimey, i was expecting an aged country star, > instead i got a paddington hard stare from my wife!! You called your daughter Dolly Parton?

New Girl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And yeah Salsaboy I want her body in a few years time :) I think Salsaboy would use the same words, but mean something completely different...

I see his account has been zapped.

MrBen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The old guard east dulwich activist intelligentsia have been priced out. And they now live in Surrey, > Sussex, Bromley and Whitstable. Raging and frothing from the benign suburbs. In my case, South Ealing/Northfields way. It's very much like East Dulwich, but with a tube station.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > With any ketchup bottle tighten lid shake rigorously- Ketchup will pour. Tis true - or give the bottle a good hit. Ketchup is a non-Newtonian liquid. Being violent towards it causes its viscosity to change and it will flow out of the bottle more readily.

Funnily enough, did my first waitrose.com shop this very evening, as there is one a couple of miles away.

I saw 'Matilda' a few weeks ago. Really good fun and worth seeing. The kids in it were very good, but 'Miss' Trunchbull stole the show. Funnily enough, I wouldn't recommend taking kids along, especially if they are under 10. At about 2.5 hours, it is far too long for them. When the lights went up at the end, most of the children I could see were dozing away happily.

Ex-ED. Like quite a few round here. There was a thread not too long ago.

Coop tells the bunch of prudes to sod off. http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/aug/13/page-3-co-operative-group If there was a co-op near me, I'd head down there and buy something. Though not the Sun, obviously.

Not sure he's gonna miss the wife, Mick Mac, but he'll be gutted about the rest.

Playing Devil's Advocate, the surrogate (usually) gets a life changing amount of money.

Secret agent? Surely James Bond is a fine upstanding citizen. OK, he kills a few people here and there...

Channel 4 news made a major faux pas... played the clip from Good Morning Vietnam with Williams saying, "Danang me, Danang me. Why don't they get a rope and hang me?" They've since apologised. Profusely.

I believe the law is that you may trim back to the boundary, but must give (or at least offer) the cuttings back to your neighbour. Which I always consider just rubbing salt into the wound, really.

Pissed off wife has found hubby's porn stash, by the sounds of it.

I've been following the bitter and downright weird surrogacy story that's been in the news of late. An Australian couple employed a surrogate in Thailand. Two babies were born, however one was disabled. The couple only took the non-disabled child. The couple now say they didn't know about the other child, and want him as well. The surrogate mother says they did know, asked her to abort the child, then later rejected the second child and so they are not having him. Over and above any moral issues around surrogacy, there are some very interesting legal issues. - Genetically, the surrogate is not the biological mother (it was a donor egg) - The Australian man is the biological father of both children, as his sperm was used. - The issue is further clouded by the fact the Australian man has a previous child sex abuse conviction. So who has parental (or any other) rights here? My guess is that - rightly or wrongly - as the only biological parent stepping forward, the Australian man has the right to the child here. But, do surrogacy rules and child protection rules change this?

Can't you do it online without it?

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Stop waving your Knob-O-Meter about Seabag, > playing havoc with my wifi... That wasn't a typo for 'wife', was it?

McAuley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Casting Brief > We are specifically looking for MALE/ FEMALE couples who have a dog that they love and is at > the centre of their relationship. Actually, I've just re-read this. Is this allowed? I would have hoped that a big multi-national would be a little more open minded.

I might try to wear this t-shirt from the Daily Mash.... http://www.moretvicar.com/media/product/2014/04/30/235_666_w300.jpg

It's a grand. I'd even consider appearing an a commercial for the Guardian for that kind of dosh. :)

hans Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is about taking the side of the oppressed vs. the oppressor, not taking sides in a war. That's about the best piece of doublespeak I've seen in a while.