pk

as it's so hard to tell when someone's joking and when they're not on a forum, i'm never sure whether people suggesting e.g. that it's inappropriate to take children to the supermarket are 'joking' or whether they are really selfish sour pusses

quality elton john cover

most of glengarry glen ross, baldwin and pacino in particular

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That wouldn't do - I can't wear red with my hair! a chapter was set up in london way back - i remember seeing a few on the tube from time to time, didn't last very long i don't think

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > pk - true, but your definition seems to be > referring to non-physical qualities (as obviously > physical attributes *are* influenced by race). So > not sure how it's particularly relevant. > > it's not my definition - it's from a dictionary, so as to how using a word to mean what it means is not relevant baffles me perhaps you could stretch your mind to extend the definition to physical qualities too and retain the key disapproving element?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fair enough muffintop, you were there and > obviously in a better position to judge the > meaning behind his words. I just found it > interesting to put a different perspective on the > discussion, as I think quite a few people do have > preference based on race... not sure where the > line is between preference and racism... by definition racism is disapproving: racism noun (UK OLD-FASHIONED racialism) DISAPPROVING the belief that people's qualities are influenced by their race and that the members of other races are not as good as the members of your own, or the resulting unfair treatment of members of other races

Ms B Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry, Moos, but I also think that anyone who > still whinges that gender discrimination is > stopping them from progressing in a mainstream job > in this country is just making excuses i don't agree and i am a man

Kerri Wrote: > Chav: An old friend of mine was trying to become > legal guardian her grandchildren (her daughter was > a drug addict and the kids were in care), who were > of mixed race, white/black; there was a long drama > as she was white and social services thought it > more fitting to put the children with a black > family, to be in the right culture??? my understanding (from experience) is that in these circumstances (not saying that it's right or wrong) is that they want a adoptive family who understand what it is like to be the victim of racism personally i think that this theory may have some value when placing children outside their blood family, but in the above circumstances probably should not apply

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Um, actually the title of this thread is > "homophobia compared with racism." > > It is not "homophobia is worse than racism." Read > it properly! > > if you read your own posts you'd remember that the opening post of the thread had the following quote : ?Schools and colleges have done much to counter racism and sexism, the same cannot be said when it comes to tackling homophobia,? he will argue. ?Despite some notable exceptions, too many educational establishments are breeding grounds for the WORST kind of casual prejudice.? you don't think that this might lead to confusion? so where's the comparison bit you promise in the title? and what's purpose?

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > 1) Gay working-class people. A huge proportion of > these people have to keep quiet about their > sexuality i guess that some might see this as a luxury - being able to 'keep quiet' when it's convenient/necessary > All this goes to show that there are complex > cultural factors to take into account. all these issues re prejudice of any kind are very complex - it's why i think to simplify them to say one type is better/worse than another is never really going to work

the bbc say a white man was seen fleeing the scene http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7487126.stm

muffintop Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dyu know what, I can't even begin to be arsed > addressing the many issues going on with certain > members of the forum, be it about Rye Lane, > Peckham itself or black people in general, there > has been a lot said over the past week or so in > relation to these topics, people there is bad > everywhere, in all walks of life etc. why some > people focus solely on Peckham or its people is > beyond me, I've had enough to be honest and will > refrain from taking part in discussions of this > kind because some people are just never going to > get it. > ditto

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Take your point(s) and I do sympathise with > Muffintop to some degree. > > However I do think it's an inescapable fact that > we are further along the tracks with regard to > racial equality than we are with equality towards > people who are gay. > > You wouldn't be allowed to use a racial slur on > the radio, for example, whereas the use of the > word 'gay' to mean rubbish is commonplace - > particularly from that nasty idiot Chris Moyles. > The comment directed at Muffintop is pretty mild > compared to the abuse I've had to put up with over > the years. If someone said I was "pretty fit for a > gay boy" I would probably be flattered! it's not a competition you know (and certainly not 'inescapable fact') i think that it's a shame that you only sympathise 'to some degree', seems pretty selfish to me

MadWorld74 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > what the hell is the problem with these bloody > people banging on about racism. FOR THE LOVE OF > CHRIST.......stop making a mountain out of a mole > hill. > > I said that Peckham was grubby and dirty and > needed some TLC, as did many other people! > > Some people could start an argument in am empty > room. typical example of what i was talking about - a response to a post that didn't try to think about the preceding post, rather jumped to an immediate conclusion - not trying to start an argument or making arrogant statements about 'bloody people' just trying to express an opinion i wasn't calling you a racist - to you i was pointing out that you don't know how to spell 'hear, hear' (and can't be bothered to check despite the fact that you're sat on the internet) my comments re racism were about the wider thread, but guess that you're not open to others' opinions

MadWorld74 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > jumpinjackflash Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > "So no one can say they don't go Peckham Rye > > because it smells or its dirty - it just makes > me > > wonder what the real reason is" > > > > Er, you've just answered your own question. > > > > If I go to Peckham it's because I have to - to > get > > a train as the links are good, Argos for > > electrical/household appliances and for some ?2 > > thongs from Primark!! However, it's not > somewhere > > you'd go just for a stroll as that high street > is > > so bloody depressing. > > > > Unlike Rye Lane, I do not need a reason to go > to > > Lordship Lane. I can happily walk about, sit > > outside and have a coffee/drink/something to > eat > > without the smell of rotting meat and littered > > pavements. Am sure most people will agree and > it > > doesn't make us all racists. > > Here Here and Here again JJF.... is that here, here - meaning east dulwich? this thread really is a bore with people on both sides running the opposing arguments to illogical extremes, (deliberately?) misinterpreting eachother and speaking on behalf to too many others rather than just themselves - e.g. 'not somewhere YOU'D go' above whereas they mean 'not somewhere I'D go' and 'MOST people would agree' when they mean 'MOST people I KNOW would agree' is racism a part of it? i dunno, but i think that being prejudiced doesn't require you to hate all or any other ethnic groups, it just requires an element of 'prejudgement' so you expect something different (or worse?) of another group than you would expect from your own, even when that is based on fact - so more people are perhaps guilty than would consider them selves to be racists

and as for the rest of the thread - guess it only goes to show that one person's 'dodgy' is another person's 'vibrant' and another's 'home' i guess that it no surprise that those that have chosen to live in se15 (self included) like it - but it seems like that it's not for all in my experience (10 years or so) using trains out of peckham stations often at night/in a suit/worse for wear, i've never had any bother

HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "But last night a spokesman for the NAAR called > that claim into question. "The sincerity of Boris > Johnson's claimed commitment to opposing racism in > his election campaign is shown to be false by the > fact that one of his first decisions is to abandon > Europe's biggest anti-racist festival," he said." > > But he's not abandoning the festival, is he? Just > the previous emphasis on 'anti-racism'. so therefore it's no longer an 'anti-racist festival' surely? why he'd do that i really don't know now johnson's advisor's comments are being 'taken out of context' http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1319795,00.html making such comments is surely foolish and naive at best, and very arguably prejudiced - let's not forget the 'racism' need not be about hatred, just inequality

macroban Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's Camberwell. No doubt about it. > > Some people confuse postal districts with other > boundaries. what is that map showing? looking at the bottom map talfourd looks to me to be on the peckham side of the line, but i don't know what the line represents

just out of curiosity, what's worth ?300k and fits in an envelope?

if you were so intrigued, why didn't you ask her?

"there's nothing worse than..."

it's certainly bucking the trend - the internet has killed off many of london's record shops that i've spent too much time and too much money in, but i'll certainly pop in ready to spend a bit more if they've got what the sort of stuff that i buy good luck them

HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > e just realised you start your second sentence > with 'from where I'm sat', PK J'ACCUSE! > > LP demand a line-up. i deny everything, it wasn't me the 'from where i'm sat' was just to say how it read to a sober person sat at a PC obviously the selfish, rude Peckham seat-hogger should have apologised for getting in the way and given up the seat to someone struggling with the complicated movements of a bus, if he happens to see this thread i hope that he sees the error of his ways and tears a strip off himself looking at the first post again, i'm thinking that perhaps it's not intended to be serious (but it's so hard to tell online)?

this is exactly the sort of post that i don't get from where i'm sat it seems that someone was p****d on the bus and (maybe?) bumped into someone sat close by (as maybe their balance was affected by beer?) and when the person asked not particularly rudely that the other stopped bumping into them the pissed person takes offence (and the high ground) but doesn't dare to say anything (other than on a friendly board) it's not actually hard to stand still on a bendy bus (certainly when sober) now is it?

eater81 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If the golden arches are coming > then Im afraid im out of here when my lease runs > out. is it really that bad that you can't live in the same postcode?