DJKillaQueen

It's reminiscent of the olympic bid video and I remember after losing the bid to us, Paris criticising our video for not having very much to do with London. The idea behind the Olympic video was that the world was already in London. I'm guessing the WC bid team thought a similar approach might work....obviously it didn't.

I've had a couple of slow moments this morning....it's as though the page 'hangs' but then if you click the refresh button it usually loads right away (or does for me).......

You are right AJM...we are not born into a level playing field. If we were then I'd have very different views on why people succeed or fail (however one defines that) in life. Polytechnics were definitely seen as second best for some (the ones that didn't make it to similar courses at University) whilst at the same time, many people were at a Poly because that was the ONLY place they could do a degree in that subject.

I thought bwing chippy meant the same as a chip on the shoulder? I feel quite uncomfortable with the phrase "exceeding the expectations of your background". I know what you mean WOD, but as your post explains there are statistics that show that the likelyhood of those born into lower social economic to achieve upward social mobility is far less than those of better social economic backgrounds.....so it's merely a reference to that. And you are right, for some of the reasons you list, every statistical measurement shows that it is extremely hard (not impossible) for most people in those groups (we used to call them working class) to climb the ladder. The gap is widening and the scope for upward mobility decreasing. The reasons are complex and Ladymucks thread in the drawing room (on inequality) briliantly explors some of the issues. There is a consensus that good education for all would go a long way to addressing the gap. The irony is of course that 'stating one grew up on an estate' is most used to show that some people defy the points of the paragraph above. i.e. if one can do it, so can everyone....which of course is just not the case. I've seen as well the public school status nonsense too. That's the same thing in essence. Is someone goes to a cheaper school then they are somehow not as worthy as the Etonian etc. Isn't that just a reflection of our obsession with background and defining pecking order?.....one of the more unlikable consequences of an 'establishment' and former class system.

Yes I have seen a lot of movies. The Mickey Rooney one is more tricky....he did so many films.

The Roger Daltry one is called 'McVicar'.

I'm not having any problems now but did have odd instances of slow page loading last week. I'm on a brand new top of the range laptop for processing speeds so I am inclined to think that it may be a server issue possibly. Hard to know for sure.

I did :))

Qatar does seem to be a very odd decision. And the heat is definitely an issue. Does anyone know why they bid for the WC in the first place?

It certainly looks that way doesn't it. He needs to turn it around somehow.

For me to know.....;-)

I'm not sure it is always a badge of honour thing though Mac. It depends on who is saying it and the context. And where it is used to prove a point, that can be anything from some kind of pride (as you say badge of honour) or it can be to show that someone has exceeded the expectations of their backgorund. For many it will just be giving straight forward info on where they come from.

I've had a marghurita or two....I won't notice the difference without the batteries!

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Low batteries That is the best line so far LOL.....:))

DECEMBER 2nd (The Snowman of Millwall)

Oooh felt-tip.....I don't even want to 'think' about that lol.

I will openly apologise for the name calling (tosser) - I was out of order for that. H's intent is to wind me up though.....of course he won't admit that but he does wind poeple up...I've had pm's from people telling me what they think of him on several occasions, so I do base my opinion on some form of evidence. He does have a condascending wrting style and tone of phrase (which isn't necesary to make a point or express a view). As for the nonsense that this thread is all about me, if that's not some personal obsession/ vendetta (call it what you like) then what is.....I barely commented in this thread after starting it anyway and to even think it was started for any reason deeper than a bit of spur of the moment fun is also deeply ridiculous. Why is he putting so much effort in finding some kind of deep psychological reason for me starting a thread about a sex toy? Because he's intent on making something out of nothing...he should just let it go and agree to disagree. Anyway I'm not rising to bait anymore, got better things to do, so will put him on hide....and get back to having fun banter with those that understand what fun is.....

And totally agree with Rosie....some common sense.

Total BS H.... If you really must know the thread was started after a day spent with friends chatting for fun about the merits of certain designs of toys...NOTHING DEEPER THAN THAT....so get a grip. And of course you are now attacking binary because she has posted clever replies to your posts (and you can't handle that from any woman).... And how you get away with belittling people so often in the forum is a mystery to me...you are incapable of ever just disagreeing - you have to embelish with digs and insults......

it was DJKQ who nuked the thread with her dismissal of men and the crimes they commit - that made it a more gender based conflict I totally reject this...and I posted earlier as to the intent of that post which was in response to H's claim that women are insecure....so please be fair. H has brought all of this on himself. In fact his final sulky comment shows that, as I have though all along, his intent is only to have a pop at me personally....I'm on his hit list (lucky me)...and THAT is what I call childish.

I think you might just have hit the nail on the head there binary!

*Sigh* H..... I respect your view Sean. It's horses for courses I guess. We all have differing views what we find silly or childish and they are always subjective. For me the question is 'where's the harm in it?' and even though a couple of posts have made even me blush...they have also made me howl with laughter so I don't believe there has been any harm or offence caused. But that's just my opinion.

Is he still at it? I don't recall any conversations with female friends on being hard done by...but yes we could have a very long dicussion of how much women had to do over the last 100 years to get to that place of semi-equality. In fact the only conversations I have with women in the pub are ones that involve us all having a good laugh (because laughter is good for the soul)...something dear H you are obviously desperately in need of.... It seems to me H your issue here is that a group of women are having a conversation about an item that mostly women use. Even worse we are having fun with that conversation as too are the men (apart form you) that have posted. Would you be as indignant if we were discussing the best brand of tampon to use for example....? Probably yes. But it doesn't mean because YOU can not handle it that no-one else should discuss it.

Thanks GG...! I think tonmorrows advent picture will avoid flowers! (not my strong point :)) )

I took the pic but am no botanist...in fact know didley squat about plants :)) but they are pretty.....