legalbeagle

Well. No one seems to have minded much so here's link. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lipstick-Things-Friends-Powder-ebook/dp/B00EA7ZNHO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376065200&sr=8-1&keywords=you+have+lipstick+on+your+teeth My essay is called "Fugitives"

Oh lordy. Publisher is in charge of profits, not me! But donation could be a way.... have asked admin. Don't want to get in trouble.....

I live locally and have contributed to an anthology that was published today. Am I allowed to start a thread promoting it? Can't quite remember your rules on that......

Gosh that's kind, and I'd love to, but I wasn't sure that I was allowed to put a link to something I'd make a profit from on here since admin works so hard to get sponsors and I'd be getting a freebie, as it were. Anyone know the rules on that?

I am a local author and have contributed to an anthology that is published today and has already made it to the top 20 on Amazon Best Sellers - humour essays. I'm wondering if there's anyone on the forum from a local bookshop who'd be interested in stocking the book? (As you can see I'm a WHIZZ at marketing!)

I demand immediate temporary withdrawal from the ECHR so that we can set fire to: Clowns, Marks and Spencer Simply Foods, Dog Poo, Men Who Live In Blue Vans on the Street, House Prices, Private Schools, Coffee Chains, State Schools, Poor People, Squatters and Second Home Owners. The End.

"It was the day my Grandmother exploded". Has to be one of the best opening lines. Love him.

Yes! Odd. Didn't come up when I searched poet or poetry..... Thanks

on the forum? Have searched but cannot find......

No they aren't.

"Ladies and Gentlemen I want to start by raising a glass to the most important people of the day, without whom none of us would be here. Now the serious part of the day is over I hope to spend lots more time with them and I know you all do too. So please raise you glasses as I give you....... The bar staff!" You can have that one for free. You're welcome. [Also available for Christenings and Bar Mitzvahs]

Absolutely. (Which also drives sis bonkers.) It seems to be an absurd circle that we all agree is absurd but that is perpetuated anyway. I honestly have no idea why - no better way of measuring performance? (Can that be true?)

It happens in schools too, I'm told. My sister teaches the first year at senior school. She tells me that because Junior school are supposed to have achieved certain levels/improvements for each child by the time they leave the school, the Junior school marks they enter her school with are (sometimes) inflated considerably. She then either has to continue the fictional achievements of the school, or mark them honestly, which then reflects badly on her school, as though the child as either got worse or gone backwards. In a different, perhaps less immediately offensive way to the rape example, this is equally worrying. No one along the way has thought about what the child is actually learning or achieving (except my sis who marks honestly and takes the rap.......) It seems that vast numbers of us will just attempt to meet the target, regardless of the effect on the underlying people who need help. Does anyone have examples of where this is NOT how humans react?

I think what makes me sad (though not I suppose surprised) is that a target should bring out the worst in human behaviour. I haven't got much experience with working to this kind of target, so can't speak personally about the pressure they might put people under. I'm not sure about their validity - is it possible to just reduce or increase something because we wish it would reduce or increase without dealing with the reason it exists in the first place? But that aside, why would (some) human beings immediately cheat, even when that means putting (in this case) victims of crime through absolute hell, rather than argue that targets are not valid? They had to sit in a room with those women and discourage them. Not follow protocols. Ignore their fear and horror and distress, to meet a target. Did the target do that? Or are they awful people?

In the light of this report about police tactics in Southwark, the setting of targets should be immediately abolished? Or do they have a role in improving crime detection? http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/damning-report-says-met-pressured-rape-victims-into-withdrawing-complaints-to-improve-crime-figures-8511357.html

Another vote for Penge for all the reasons stated. Lovely big Victorian terraces, signs of change already, nice mix of people and fab transport. Don't write it off just yet.....

Well title was changed, and apology made. More than you'd get from some......

Well you're both entitled to that view. I continue to think that be cult of celebrity makes for poor reporting and a lack of dignity in reporting and that Allison Pearsons article makes that point well.

I'm not sure I understand your point Jamster. The only point made or conclusion drawn by me is that celebrity status leads to poor reporting and a lack of dignity for victims, of which this is a good example. I have very deliberately made no argument about his guilt or what happened the night Reeva Steenkamp died. And i have repeatedly said that i am not making a point about sexism or gender. Nor have I said this indicates a decline in moral standards (I don't think that, actually). Tabloids will of course do this all the time it sells newspapers.

To be fair, in the context of the article Im not sure that's what she is saying.

Well - we are back to the "we get the press we deserve" argument?

It is. In the body of the article she refers to the headline she is arguing against: "Blade Kills Blonde" It's a play on that, to make her point.

Interesting article in the Telegraph from Allison Pearson on this very point: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/9344453/Oscar-Pistorius-case-The-Blonde-is-the-victim-here-Blade.html Not sure I agree with her assumption that he is guilty - however bad this looks I'd prefer to wait for due process and a verdict, but on celebrity she is spot on. I also noticed last night on the BBC news this story was referred to twice, and both times the "headline" statement was "Oscar Pistorius's Girlfriend" with no name given. At a time when it can no longer be valid to argue that had her name been used, no one would have known who we were talking about. Her name was Reeva Steenkamp.

Maxxi I'm sure you're right. It got headlines, hence being worded that way. Though I have noticed that since there was a backlash against The Sun, in particular, print media has been a little more respectful. This may also be in part to do with her past being raked over and thus her name becoming more "celeb" than before. I just can't imagine how I'd feel if my daughter was killed and I had to keep reading that she was "killer's girlfriend". Must be just awful. I know that the families in this case seem at the moment to be fairly united, but in principle it must be a dreadful way to have a loved one remembered. By reference always to the person who caused their death. Inevitable, given our celeb culture, but pretty dreadful.

And there you go. You make what appears to another person to be a sexist point and are called up on it. You go into a lengthy explanation of why, on your definition of something, it isn't sexist, and ask them to accept it. And I do. I have no reason to assume that your following lengthy redefinition and explanation isn't sincerely meant, however self serving or otherwise it may now look. It has a ring of plausibility. It could also be pulled apart. I'll choose to believe you because we haven't met and I'm not in the habit of calling people I do not know a liar. It'd be nice if you did the same for others. Now if you don't mind, I'm not going to engage with you further. You've made your point. I've made mine. We'll agree to disagree or you can argue with yourself.