Robert Poste's Child

Is anyone else slightly disturbed by the lack of innuendo in this thread?

Of course it's based on supply and demand, like any other industry. Silly of you to berate me about something I haven't actually said.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, the notion that these films are something > that can be passively consumed is nonsense and ill > thought through. These are not Japanese anime, > these are not victimless. > > As has already been stated, in order for a film to > exist, (to be "passively consumed"), a child has > to have been brutally tortured on camera. The > demand is what generates these films. If there > was no demand, many of these children would not be > raped. > > I have compassion for people who struggle with > their sexual desires, especially those whose > desires are beyond the pale. Humans are indeed > complicated creatures, and I'm sure many of us on > here have, at times, dark thoughts that we'd > prefer were never brought to light. However, > acting on our desires, when it causes harm to > another, deserves no compassion - understanding > and insight yes - but forgiveness is only for the > abused to offer. RosieH, I'm familiar with the arguments against child porn and I already said that of course it's vile and wrong. At the same time I do consider that people who 'only' think about or watch that kind of thing - while both of those are certainly abhorrent - are not in the same class of evil as the people who act it out, whether privately or for commercial gain. Personally I don't think that's unreasonable.

For goodness' sake, do think before you post. Buddug, you say you're saving your compassion for the victims. Fine, but I don't see any expressions of compassion in any of your posts. You probably know already that people who watch that kind of thing have usually been abused as children themselves. Black and white thinking like yours never resolves anything. Bubbles, the truth is you don't know that he 'enjoyed watching' the films: you don't know what his motivation, intentions or state of mind were. There is no suggestion at this stage that he didn't protect children at the church or the school. Your argument would come across as more reasonable if you phrased it accurately.

I'm horrified by the viciously judgemental comments of some people on this subject. Of course I'm not suggesting child porn is anything other than vile and wrong, but no one appears to be suggesting he was anything more than a passive consumer of it, and in addition we don't know how long it had been going on for, or what brought him to that point. I'm not a practising Christian but I do know that love, forgiveness and not judging others are part of it. For what it's worth I also think calling him a coward for committing suicide is short-sighted. Have you ever tried putting yourself, just for a moment, in someone else's shoes, and imagined the level of self-loathing, mental pain and sheer despair they might feel at that moment? Suicide is a cardinal sin to some Christians so hardly an easy way out for a priest.

At this time of year you want your thermal tights on, at least for daytime. M&S heatgen are good because they're as thin as normal opaque tights but warmer, whereas the traditional thermal ones with wool are too bulky. To complete your winter granny chic look you need a thermal vest under the dress, knee-length boots, socks and a cashmere cardie. Then you should be toasty.

The DPG's statement says that they're in consultation with employees, so presumably they haven't yet made a formal decision on how many posts will go and which people will be affected (in theory, at least, though no doubt they have a number in mind as a result of the review). Not sure the Gallery could reasonably give much more information publicly at the moment given where they seem to be in the process, though you can understand the feelings of the employees involved and why they'd choose to leak information about their case. It's never an easy thing to go through.

HmB,you want to try wearing tights: what you said, but all the way up your leg, and you only realise once they've cut off your femoral artery, AND if you try to straighten them rather than taking them off and starting again your irritation will make a hole so you have to throw them away and find a new pair anyway. Twisted sock? You don't know when you're well off.

Coming over a bit Russell Brand there.

Mick Mac, I think you may have hit on something there. I'll try visualising more food served that way.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Mick Mac Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > I'm completely failing to make any > progress. > > > Had > > > > to fend off unwelcome advances yesterday > > > > > > > > > that's a nice problem to have. > > > > Not really. It's frustrating when you've said > no > > in all the ways you can think of, thought > they'd > > got it and then find out they didn't. It's only > a > > nice problem if you fancy them. > > Have you tried asking him to put a paper bag over > his head Not even if he covered himself in Haagen Dazs salted caramel.

Pauline, do you have pineapple chunks in your shop? I have a craving.

Wouldn't that make it the same as the main General ED section?

Thanks.

Maybe I've missed the point (I'm not the most technically aware), but what would an EDF app do that would be different from how it works already on a smartphone?

I can see there are plausible rational arguments, but why are the people involved always weirdos?

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I know people in the country who take home > > anything they run over and cook it for their > > families because they don't want the animal to > > have died in vain. Ethics are tougher in the > > country apparently. > > I have always thought of that as an argument of > convenience somewhat. Personally I thought it was revolting. One friend became such an enthusiast she would sit in her car idling the engine waiting for something to step out. The bloodlust became clear when her family refused to eat it and she carried on.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So wouldn't a combination of less onerous new > t&cs, more input from sponsors, reductions in > senior salaries and sale of one or two works be a > better solution? In my view cutting heads and squeezing front-line staff is a fairly desperate measure, so I do wonder if it's the right solution here. I get that profit = income less costs and tax, so reducing costs increases your margin, but it's hardly a commercial business, is it? And it has tax breaks due to its charitable status, not to mention the contributions of Friends and corporate sponsorship of exhibitions. If the front-line staff are mainly part-timers or casual perhaps they could achieve much the same thing softly over five to ten years through natural attrition. If I worked there I'd be suggesting ramping up the events side plus increased PR to build visitor numbers. Did you know they did wedding ceremonies? I didn't and I've lived around the corner for years.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyone able to put an estimate on how much this > will save the gallery per annum? Hard to say based on the available info. Presumably the front-of-house people are majority part-time and/or shift workers, so as a ballpark figure 19 redundancies less any statutory pay-offs - maybe ?200K plus further savings over time due to new Ts&Cs / reduced benefits? It will be interesting to see how this develops as those who are at risk seem to be members of Unite so will presumably have union backing.

According to the McDonalds UK website, ingredients for fries are as follows: Potatoes, Vegetable Oil (Sunflower, Rapeseed), Dextrose (only added at beginning of the potato season). Prepared in the restaurants using a non-hydrogenated vegetable oil. Salt is added after cooking. http://www.mcdonalds.co.uk/ukhome/product_nutrition.sides.44.mcdonalds-fries.html

I know people in the country who take home anything they run over and cook it for their families because they don't want the animal to have died in vain. Ethics are tougher in the country apparently.

Maybe they're not the same people buying the organic produce and going to McDonalds? Different people like different things.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I'm completely failing to make any progress. > Had > > to fend off unwelcome advances yesterday > > > that's a nice problem to have. Not really. It's frustrating when you've said no in all the ways you can think of, thought they'd got it and then find out they didn't. It's only a nice problem if you fancy them.

Not 0 or H20 though. Or C7H8N4O2 (my favourite).

Tinky Winky Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I can't see a figure for the total actual > > headcount that's at risk. How many people are > > likely to lose their job altogether, and how > many > > to be put on new Ts&Cs? > > From the Facebook page "Save Jobs at Dulwich > Picture Gallery": > > Senior Management at Dulwich Picture Gallery > propose to make over half of the current visitor > services team redundant, as part of the gallery?s > cost-cutting programme.19 members of the > front-of-house team will face redundancy. Those > retaining their jobs will be asked to sign new > annualised hours contracts which will force them > to work any hours stipulated by management without > over-time rates. The expected impact will be a > lower annual income for visitor services staff. Thanks, Tinky Winky; hadn't seen the actual figure. So if 19 = over half of the team then I guess the total number put at risk would be 30-something? Or is it a team of 19 put at risk and the expected number of redundancies is lower than that?