Domitianus

mightyroar Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I dont understand that last post. > I'm fairly sure its another dig at children who > dare to make noise and run around and other > outrageous things. Is it? No it isn't. DM pointed out that at Disney she did not see a single child throwing a tantrum. I was introducing the possibility that, rather than us being intolerant of children in the UK, the lack of tantrums in Paris might be due to intolerance of such public behaviour in their children by French parents. Clearly, from DM's description, it was not the case that French children were being badly behaved and this was regarded as being acceptable - it was the case that French children were NOT behaving badly in public and there must be some reason for that, such as a society that will not condone ill-mannered public behaviour in its children.

Perhaps the 'intolerance' that makes the difference here is for the type of tantrums and ill-mannered displays that kids get away with in the UK? Just a thought.

I still want to know what happened to the lovely Nina who used to work there. She was the tastiest thing on the menu.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I didn't know that SKS, but I guess it makes sense > (until we are all tracked by our mobiles anyway) > > No kudos for me MP - I dialled 999 - I reckon I > could do it again easy > > Hard to believe I only had 3 pints (or was it 4) - > I feel like I've been in an American Football game > without the gear I think you are hiding your light under a bushel here. This dialling 999 is easy type comment - who are you kidding? Wouldn't know how to go about it myself. Any tips?

lilolil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LOL Yes I didnt think of that! > > Oh well............ Durrrhhh!!!

About two years ago I gave up drinking coffee for a while, having realised that my consumption was easily up to about 15 cups a day. Everyone was telling me how I would suffer terrible withdrawal headaches etc etc. Err...I didn't. In fact it was all quite easy. I went back on coffee again after about a few months simply because it was so awkward dealing with teabags.

mightyroar Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 'The primary purpose of a pub (a location to > imbibe alcoholic beverages)' > > but......you can imbibe an alcoholic beverage > pretty much anywhere. Why not on your own at home? > Because what the pub does is give you a social > context. IE places you in a universe inhabited by > OTHER PEOPLE. in all their shapes and sizes and > with their various (and sometimes very annoying) > accessories....phones, braying laughter, > children......... > > Hell is other people eh? Pubs do indeed provide a social context for the imbibing of alcohol and the issue that I think is at the heart of discussion is whether the presence of large numbers of children is consistent with that context. If those who use a pub for its primary purpose (imbibing alcohol in the company of others) are actually intimidated or made to feel uncomfortable doing so due to the presence of said children then I would suggest that the primary function of a pub is being usurped.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Personally the kids in the Plough only bother me > if I want to get rip roaring drunk, swear and > smoke and make merry. In which case there are > other pubs. If I just want some lunch and a pint > they normally don?t get to me. Except if people > have crying babies or those screechy sort of > children. That can be as unpleasant as (to go back > to what ???? said) sitting next to a bunch of > braying horsey girls (which I had the displeasure > of doing on the train this morning). But Brendan, effectively what you are saying is that when there are kids in the pub you are unable to get drunk and make merry and have to go else where. This is the very point for chrissake! Pubs are places, first and foremost, where people go to drink and, frequently, get a bit shit-faced yet you are stating that you have to go elsewhere to do this when there are kids present. This is ridiculous! The primary purpose of a pub (a location to imbibe alcoholic beverages) is now being supplanted by those who see it as some sort of an adventure playground for their kids. It is as ridiculous and unacceptable as the notion of kids not being able to go on the swings or roundabouts in the park because there is a bunch of winos sitting on them drinking cider - the wrong people are calling the shots! I mean, for the love of God, if people are intimidated out of going to the pub to get drunk because there are kids there, then the lunatics have well and truly taken over the asylum!

She said it should go on one of them plinths in Trafalgar Square for the world to see, so she did! Said it was a national treasure.

mightyroar Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > what, blame someone for knocking scalding coffee > over their child? > > Outrageous. What has ED come to. My point is that when kids are allowed to run riot in crowded environments where food and drink is served these things happen and that some holier than thou parents are happy to point the finger at any other party, no matter how innocent, rather than acknowledge that they failed to look after their children in allowing them to run all over the shop. I had a child run straight into me in the street and was blamed by his mum for not watching where I was going despite the fact that I was stationary when the impact happened. I can assure you I expressed my sentiments about the incident clearly!

And she said she agreed it was under-rated ;-)

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is too filthy too put up on a public forum. > I'd hate to get arrested and ruin my career. I told her she could see my arse! ::o

tinagwee Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "the po faced old wankers will scurry for their > wretched middens " now thats going a bit far, > generalising all those that dont have kids as po > faced old wankers! As for lost money from meals, > the plough as lost my lunch money many a time when > I went in to eat and left very quickly. > > In my defense can I say that the plough is my > local and it is nice and so why shouldnt I expect > to be able go to my local pub. The Castle is not > nice nor is particularly local to me. I do go to > the CPT (again not as comfortable) or to 72 to > avoid the mayhem but they are a 25 min walk which > is fine most of the time but sometimes I just want > a magners close to home to chill out, or sometimes > I just want a coffee somehere nice before 7pm, > didnt think that was too much. Silly me. > > Question: Where is Clockhouse and Hoopers and I > will check them out for "christ sake" as told by > someone in this thread. > > I do get the general impression that round these > parts it is considered nearly a crime to not have > kids and as such those like me only deserve to > live in and hang out in complete dumps. Excuse me > for getting above my station mlord. > > I moved here from Brixton and I never once saw a > child in any pub there, funny that. Lots of > socialogy students would probably think it would > be the working class that do that rather than the > up and coming or middle class. mmmm What would > Jamie Oliver think of it! heheh > Looks like I will just have to do a bit of > adjusting and try to avoid the plough during the > day even though it is the most convenient place to > me otherwise I will just get lynched by the > craaaazy east dulwich parents. Order a hot coffee with your Magners and if any brat comes to close just "accidentally" knock it over them. A few scald cases and the parents might get the message. No, I am not really suggesting anyone do this but if it genuinely happened accidentally I guarantee a fair percentage of people would blame you rather than their own failure to supervise their kids.

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So, back to things that are underrated - cyber > flirting? I agree, so I PM'd you x

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nice to know you cum clean, Dom. I'm a bit more > messy myself! So we have heard, although I must say I find that strangely arousing ;-)

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But as you mentioned in another thread, you are > prone to hyperhidrosis. Are you sure the laydees > appreciate you attributing your oversize moniker > to them? Aha! That, dear Chav, was a lie. I must cum clean!

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not sure if I'll like it Dom! But baby, you ain't seen the size of my moniker yet. I lurve to attribute it to all the laydeees!

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yep, wanker is a moniker you can safely attribute > to your royal chavness! Oh baby, let me attribute you a moniker..!

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Masturbation?" - I concur! Thought you might ;-)

And the rest of your ears? You do realise everyone will be able to identify you in public now?

Well, since blushing is essentially an engorgement of blood in any particular body part....I will leave the rest to your imagination.

MrBen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I apologise for my earlier comment and have edited > it above to remove the offending words "nice > tits". This is a serious forum and it has no place > for ungentlemanly, sexist comments such as these. > Especially from MrBen who was a little the worse > for wear at the time. > > Moral: Dont drink and post! > I should think so too, Mr Ben. I am glad you have edited your earlier post using the expression "Nice tits" to remove the unacceptable comment "Nice tits". Really there is no justification for using the words "Nice tits" on this forum even if you are referring to a nice set of tits. Can other posters suggest alternatives to the expression "Nice tits" should any other poster wish to refer to an admirable pair of mammary glands? > MrBen (apologetic and mortified tail between his > legs) unapproved because the guy's a nob and is saying "great tits " a lot much to do with the thread? I think not. - mark

Sorry, Mark, I sweat profusely. It wasn't actually you. It was actually my pet dog who looks remarkably like you and has the same ISP. And he didn't actually spill my drink - he buried his bone in the garden. I got the two acts mixed up. In recompense for my false claim for recompense I will donate a tin of Whiskas to the Battersea Dogs Home.

lozzyloz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How about 3somes? Domitanus, Kalamity Kel and > CWALD;-) I am blushing....but not on my face >:D<

Since I am teetotal I won't, no, but I am sure there are a vast number of parents who would object to that particular mix of alcohol consumption near children yet who seem quite happy to inflict their sprogs on people who might want a chance to have a bevvy in peace. Also, I bet lager swillers would be much more courteous and restrained in public parks than kids often are in pubs.