HAL9000

I remember collecting a jam jar full of farthings until I figured out that thrupenny bits and tanners were a better investment. Those were the days: a one and a half penny Jamboree bag, a halfpenny sherbet bomb and a farthing?s worth of flying saucers and liquorice would see me through the week. My first pack of cigarettes was five Woodbines ? biggest mistake of my life, I reckon.

Last night's dinner (home made from fresh except for frozen peas): Parsnip and potato mash (with ground black pepper) Steamed carrots and peas Grilled pork loin with pineapple, honey and mustard sauce Today's lunch: Grilled beef pattie served in a bun with fried onions, a slice of tomato and cheese garnished with mustard and tomato sauce. Tomorrow night's dinner (I'm out tonight) (home made with frozen prawns and tinned Italian peeled tomatoes): King prawn tikka massala with tumeric rice

Does French law say anything about the dress code of its 25,000 Haredi Jews: the men wear distinctive wide-brim hats, dark overcoats and, sometimes, long beards and side curls - the women wear long skirts and cover their hair (in public), usually under a wig and often a headscarf too? It seems there's an on-going furore against France's banning of Sikh turbans! Sikhism in France

Magpie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well at the moment they are effectively imprisoned > in their veils Devout Muslim women would probably say that their veils sanctify and liberate them - it's a matter of perspective.

Magpie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I understand it there > is no requirement to cover ones face in Islam, and > hence no religious necessity to do so. The practice of Islam is subject to interpretation. Some interpretations hold that male strangers should not be allowed to look upon the face of a married woman. Without a veil, devout women might feel unable to venture out lest they disobey God?s will and act sinfully. Legislation might have the effect of imprisoning some Muslim women in their own homes - as they are in some Muslim countries, where they cannot appear in public unaccompanied.

Do you mean: are the British able to oppose the wearing of religious garb without feeling guilty of intolerance or racism?

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Altogether a fine bit of statistical abuse to > proffer misinformation. And I'm still not sure to what end. Misquoted a draft paper - no hidden agenda.

Magpie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > flicked through the document. The actual stat is > that one third of males born in 1953 had received > at least one criminal conviction. Quite right - that's what I had meant to convey but somehow managed to conflate one with the other.

The Chair Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you have a citation for those statistics Hal? The Home Office/Ministry of Justice does not routinely collate or publish such figures. However, a study was published in 2001 based on much older data: Criminal careers of those born between 1953 and 1978 (England and Wales). Extrapolated trends from those data indicate contemporary figures within the area indicated above, which, I stress, are approximate, given the absence of official, up-to-date figures. My source is an as yet unpublished academic paper (that inter alia cites the above document) presently undergoing peer review.

rgutsell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In central London, there were huge bomb > sites. In the mid fifties, my best mate and I > would buy Red Rover bus tickets, travel together > into London by bus, and spend the day clambering > about in deserted sites, in dark archways, cellars > etc etc. I grew up in Fitzrovia (near the Post Office Tower). Your post brings back many pleasant memories of a childhood spent exploring the hundreds of bombsites that littered the City of Westminster, Bloomsbury and Marylebone in those days.

.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How does ones sexuality become compromised? > > Influenced - pooossssibly. But compromise suggests > a right and wrong and somewhere inbetween that I'm > not sure about As in confused or influenced away from what it might have been otherwise, sort of thing (assuming that such a thing is even possible).

Accept the march of time gracefully and live each day as if it were your last.

That's a brilliant example of how new technology can change society. I'm surprised there aren't similar apps for lesbians, hetros, 'others' and (for example) prostitutes, or have I missed them?

I suppose the principal concern is that they might influence the sexuality of their children or even sexually abuse them? Sexual abuse occurs in regular families, so nothing new here. So, the question becomes, will such parents polarise or compromise the sexually of their children? Well, I guess that must be a possibility. Is that good or bad? I don't know.

I don't think they are lesbians. Their sexual orientation is that of homosexual males who happen to be biological females.

There must be an app for that, too.

Why not download a 'BJ detector app' - it makes voyeurism so much easier? "There's an app for everything"

Magpie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anything to add? I wasn't complaining, just pointing out that the discussion had acquired a broader spectrum of late.

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lagardo It's Lagado. > I would have thought that reference would have > been like a rallying call to the sceptics and > denialists no? I was half-tempted to refer to 'glow-in-the-dark cucumbers' but decided not to open the door for anyone inclined to lower the thread's tone :)

SteveT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > isn't this off topic? Hardly worth bothering. Of the twenty-four posts on this page, only six of them (including yours and mine) mention Cadbury.

Ladymuck Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway, are you suggesting that we should all go > around deliberately aiming for dog turds ... It depends. Some people wear them as jewellery (click on image to read more). And George W Bush swears by his Dog Turd, apparently.

Hmmm. I'm channelling more Beano than Dandy?

Or proof?

dandies