Jump to content

Recommended Posts

sjw Wrote:

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

> Ear piercing while you wait !


Yes, I always find that hilarious!


Unrelated, but this thread reminds me of a time, probably mid 80s, when the phrase du jour was ?This is it? said very meaningfully and implying someone has just uttered something of great depth.

TheCat Wrote:

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

> "You can't have your cake and eat it"

>

> Well...what's the sodding point of having a cake

> if it's not for eating?!!!!


It's a misquote that stuck, apparently. It should be, 'eat your cake and have it' - then it makes sense.


Bit like people saying, 'the proof is in the pudding'.

My old aunt used to quote 'she is all mouth and no trousers' never figured it out. It was in relation to a middle aged woman who had several sons.


Another one was 'I'll go to the foot of our stairs' and if anyone said 'Haha' she would say 'HaHa she cried waving her wooden leg in the fog' That used to make me laugh and still does nearly 50 years on.

Pugwash Wrote:

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

> My old aunt used to quote 'she is all mouth and no

> trousers' never figured it out. It was in relation

> to a middle aged woman who had several sons.


I know this one - actually a corruption of the original northern phrase "all mouth and trousers" meaning full of talk and flashy gear (i.e. trousers rather than traditional working man's gear like gaiters or overalls) but no real substance. The corruption "and no trousers" is generally taken to mean plenty of talk but can't back it up in the, ahem, trouser department. Variants include the American "big hat, no cattle" and my favourite, again northern, "all fur coat and no knickers" - which is probably closest to what your aunt meant, I'm guessing!


ETA There's probably something in having phrases kids don't understand to flummox them - I remember reading a Paul McCartney interview when he was talking about his dad, who, when asked for sixpence to go to the chippy, would say no, and when asked why not would say things like "Because seagulls don't ride bicycles, that's why not," leaving young Paul confused and defeated.

Elphinstone's Army Wrote:

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

> and so it begins.....

> can anyone explain this meaningless peurile quote

> please


Somewhere in one of the LOTR trilogy, isn't it? I think it's a very useful phrase, because it lets you know that whoever's using it ("Sorry I'm late, there was a points failure at Clapham" - "And so it begins") is a humourless twonk.

My mother used to say "I should coco" in dismissing something that ruffled her feathers. Silly old cow was easily ruffled too.


Never sure what she actually meant by those words. She's still alive but having not spoken to her in 25 years i'm unlikely to find out from her.

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> Pot calling the kettle black. What if the pot is

> purple, or silver, or copper, or any number of

> colours that pots seem to be.



They were black due to being used on an open fire, nothing to do with their underlying colour.

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

    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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