Jeremy

I have to say Loz... not really quite sure what you're getting at here... don't know why you thought the conversation had "moved to the depths of the Guardian-style-feminist opinion writer". The term - taken at face value - wouldn't be so bad, but when it's used as a criticism I think that says a lot about a person's views.

Not being able to go on holiday is one thing (especially with kids, costs really start to rack up, and going away is crazy expensive during school holidays). But specifically choosing to avoid going abroad... I think that's a bit of a shame.

If catching a bus (or walking 20 minutes) to the station is your idea of convenient, then fine. It's not mine.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And...the ridiculous footwear that women are > expected to wear in order to look 'fashionable' is > the modern day equivalent of foot-binding! Are men really to blame for that? People can wear whatever they want..

Not my idea of fun BB. The location is a drawback IMO.

Peckhamrye Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Au contraire > Jeremy....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yummy_mummy I think you miss my point...

I know the OP is just a wind-up, but I've been growing increasingly sick of this "yummy mummy" crap for a while now... reading between the lines, there's an implication that once a woman has had children, she should start dressing in frumpy clothes and abandon her social life.

FYI I wasn't poo-pooing fears about NHS reforms, and I've certainly no desire to see spending cuts! (neither I am a 'rightie' by almost anyone else's measure). I am just not quite sure why it's held in such extraordinarily high affection. Also, while healthcare in the UK is certainly good, this is just one report...

Similar distance actually SJ... but E&C is a complete crap hole. It is cheap though... I seem to remember a Groupon voucher offering bowling for four - with 4 x burger/fries/coke - for a tenner.

If there are holes all over the place then I really think it's the landlord's responsibility to get that sorted.

Ah yes, Chris Waddle, that noted football manager.

Well if you like purpose built blocks and aren't too put off by the drawbacks (not near a station, main road/no parking) then you might have found the place for you.

I quite like it. The flats are a good size, and its close to the park. The building is not unattractive. On the flipside, its miles away from a station. And a purpose built (ex LA??) block on a main road is never going to be anyone's dream home, so they don't sell like hot cakes. And they probably won't rise in price as well as a smaller period conversion.

I do hope there will be a good selection of gluten/dairy free confectionary. Fair trade, of course. Oh, and if there's chocolate, it simply must be single estate, 80% cacao. And frehsly pressed juices, please. I'm so glad we'll have such a marvellous resource for the whole community to share.

I think you're wrong cle. We live in a big city, crime happens... it's sensible to take basic precautions. If the woman in question (and maybe people reading this thread) can learn a little something from it, then at least there's a hint of a silver lining to this whole thing.

No point dominating posession if you don't have discipline in defence, or creativity in front of the goal. Uruguay were better in both areas and deserved the win. Shame we have to wait for England to be put out of their misery.

What does "full high street status" mean?

cle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I look forward to a programme of Peruvian coming > of age dramas and live Glyndebourne 2015. And Iron Man 4.

Yeah yeah yeah... I'm basically in agreement... I can see how it can happen in the heat of the moment but of course everyone knows in the cold light of day that it's dangerous. Me? I wouldn't want to damage my suspension...

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Going all The Professionals over an iPhone is ott > at best and dangerous at worst. The thought of someone snatching someone's property in broad daylight completely unchallenged depresses me.

Admittedly media reports rather than ofsted findings.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It was more an atempt to point out inconsistency > and hypocrisy than to analogise the two situations > per se. It's the quote "apparently more sinister because they're located in cities and involve different religions" that I really disagree with. The recent cases in Birmingham involved enforced religious practises.. e.g. fasting, sexual discrimination/segregation, prayer at the start of lessons, lack of sex education. In some cases racism and intolerance were actively encouraged. It's not a simple case of "Chistianity good Islam bad".

Well there's a clear difference between a visiting vicar, and an attempt to convert a school into a strict faith school by the back door. In fact the analogy beggars belief. Secondly there's an implication there that all faiths are equally representative/misrepresentative of a western way of life, which is surely also flawed. Of course the simple solution is to scrap faith schools, and to ban religious worship in schools altogether (no hymns/prayers/readings at all). Study of religious texts should be limited to RE, which should cover all major religions equally including the case for humanism/atheism.

Definitely not JK, the stems grow straight up and wouldn't wind round like that.