Jump to content

Recommended Posts

dullified Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If "We prefer male nanny. Or just nanny." Then why

> didn't you title the post "Sex wth the Male

> Nanny"?


I would say 'schoolboy error' dullified, but in the context of the thread I fear it may get us all put on a register of some sort.

My good friend (male) often reminisces about the youthful, summery days he spent as a deckchair attendant in Eastbourne during the 1980s. Said it was the most sex he's ever had (on the job, so to speak).


He used to let the topless bathers go free, after some lingering discussions with them on deckchair hot spots and related costs. He likes to think it was the way he held his ticket machine at a jaunty angle that attracted them.

legalbeagle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I would echo comment above. Stick to ED/Peckham

> and you'll get trouble. But those in the village

> would simply NEVER sleep with the help.


Indeed, and they only do "it" with the hubby as a duty.


You know, in return for pin money.



Nette;-)

Ted, I think the only way you will be able to gain an answer to your question is to maybe post a photo of yourself in said uniform, on here, and let the people vote...?

And when divising the questionaire it could be good to have more than just a few options.... as we know things are very rarely just yes or no!

I see I have a bit to catch up on.


HonaB is taking things a bit far, I feel. I have no time for Spinoza.


Dullified shoots and scores. I can only claim marketing as my cover.


Katie seems to think this is a thread to boast of past satiation. It is nothing of the kind, of course.


Embo finds a way through my armour by appealing to my understandable vanity. As indeed does Dorothy. I will resist, but only just.


Hugeunot reminds me of the T-shirts a zealous manager foisted on my band when we were still working our way up through the club scene. His refusal to take me seriously as a lyricist led to our break up, of course, although Gary and Mark had some later success, I believe, as part of a dance act. If at that time I sought consolation in the arms of my fanbase, I think I could be forgiven.

That suprises me about you Ted - there was me thinking you'd be all over Spinoza.


Not that I know the fellow from a cat's bum hole myself but evry time old Reggie Jeeves used to infest the Junior Gannymede with his presence, all you get from him was 'Spinoza this' 'Spinoza that' and likely as not Spinoza's Uncle bloody Mauritz.

Honestly a fellow couldn't make a bawdy remark about a lady's maid's embonpoint without Spinoza being brought into the coversation.

My attitude was the hell with Spinoza and the horse he rode into town on, but this didn't deter Reggie, he never missed an opportunity to pontificate on the subject.


The last straw came when he organised the collection for my birthday and got me a copy of Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata instead of the banjolele lessons I had strongly hinted would be my preference. The man was a positive menace.


Small wonder he was unanimously blackballed when his membership came up for renewal.


On yer ruddy bike as I'm sure Spinoza would have put it.

????, I did mean nights.


But your mention of tights has raised memories of a spell I spent touring the Eastern Seaboard of the USA with Les Hommes Du Ballet Cleveland. All was going well until we hit our Miami booking, at which point the pumps began to fall off things somewhat, resulting in a string of cancelled bookings and broken young men. I think half the corps are still propping up a barre somewhere in South Beach.


I salvaged what I could for the sake of the careers of the younger dancers, and moved on.

Ted,


Life is simply too brief and I commend you in thinking to follow your natural passion for children......


But listen again. Sounds kind of creepy, no?


The natural suspicions harboured towards a man playing a traditionally female role are one of many hurdles you'll have to counter and as such I wish to impart some business advice to get you off the ground...


Branding. A vulgar concept in these parts but necessary. You must be confident in your proposition but avoid unseemly innuendo. Make the mistake of the local handyman who has flirtatiously likened himself to Fleming's Bond and you will almost certainly be asked to tighten more than a mother's hinge.


Names to avoid would include such alliterations as: Manny 'Nuff, Max(imum) Manny and All Manny.


Second, know your market. I have glimpsed the Village and confirm it to be fertile territory but be shrewd with your targets (...a Canny Manny?). The old money will treat your commercially motivated attempts at role reversal with disdain. Aim for the newly moneyed liberals, and from personal experience, I should avoid the local yoga class.


Good luck.

Annette Curtain Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> legalbeagle Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I would echo comment above. Stick to ED/Peckham

> > and you'll get trouble. But those in the

> village

> > would simply NEVER sleep with the help.

>

> Indeed, and they only do "it" with the hubby as a

> duty.

>

> You know, in return for pin money.

>

>

> Nette;-)



mmmmmm!!!!! (?)B)

Dear All


Ummm disappointing to think how adults think about other adults but if you can find

Manny " Nuff" , Max(imum)Manny and all Manny Manny Manny Manny.!!!!!! in this town


Why this subjects are so persistent. I guess the Manny is not interested any more

I don't have experience in what all of you are writting on this thread but

I can asure you all of you will be wasting your time.


I was Sorry to read that some of you have had bad experience in the past but

in one millon is always one and not Manny manny manny are the same remember that and do you search

better next time. Good Luck to all of you and move on from B.. was easy for Manny why not for you !! mmmm...

and find someone else. Good Luck guys :)


Lynda distance student from London University

Ted Max Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I feel this is a look I might want to avoid. To me

> it just reeks of a sort of seedy sexual

> availability. With a pony tail.

>

> So I was thinking some sort of a uniform might be

> a good idea.



Do you think there's any truth at all about this agency ?


I think Tomorrow, May , or June will be fine to find out more.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...