Jump to content

Recommended Posts

daizie Wrote:

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

> please elaborate Brendan.. ?



Loose Women = middle aged women watching middle aged women doing what they think middle aged women should be doing, i.e. sitting around talking about stuff, being slightly risqu?, and awfully funny sometimes, having opinions and every now and then letting their deep seated prejudices break to the surface.


Top Gear = middle aged men watching middle aged men doing what they think middle aged men should be doing, i.e. crashing cars talking about stuff, being slightly risqu?, and awfully funny sometimes, having opinions and every now and then letting their deep seated prejudices break to the surface.

daizie that it a sexist ageist comment you made earlier about them being past it.

Men that age are more respected in society, whilst women are being more and more marginalised past the age of 45.


A few of them are indeed 'only' in their thirties, but it's the range of subject matters that really irritates me, and makes me realise I am a snob.


Wasn't Carol married to Chris Evans? I seem to remember in the good ol' days of BBC London when it was a rock station she and he had a radio show on it together and they were brilliant.

Actually I don't mind Loose Women. It's better than Bargain Hunt.


It's akin to going down the pub with my girlfriend's aunties and a bag of amusing cock-shaped vegetables for entertainment - but then I guess that's the point.


It's complete drivel, naturally, but it's on at 12.30pm.. what do you expect? A Bafta-winning documentary premiere?

I kind of look forward to it, when I'm ill/ hungover and off work.


I can happily spend a day watching The Wright Stuff/ This Morning/ Loose Women/ Cash in the Attic and any of the programme featuring Kristian Digby.


I confess I've stayed up to watch the repeat at about 2am.


Sad really.

I too resent the 'past it' comment - I'm nearing 40 and don't feel (or indeed look so am often told) much different to late twenties, early thirties. I've got a big group of girlfriends and we discuss Loose Women type stuff but loads of other stuff too - politics, world events, whatever, along with the usual loose women stuff - kids, sex, how crap men can be, make-up, losing weight, counsel on each other's personal traumas (if needs be!) etc, etc.


That's why I like the show, it makes me feel warm and fuzzy and makes me laugh out loud....I work a few floors down from the show at ITV and if there was a job going on it I'd be there like a shot!


If you don't like it, bloomin' well turn over or turn off.


And yes Carol was married to Chris Evans, but now engaged to toy boy researcher she met on the show - good on her!

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> Actually I don't mind Loose Women. It's better

> than Bargain Hunt.


Time to come in out of the sun *Bob*, there's no comparison, the rakish weskit and bow tie combo of the Wonnacot, the strategy by certain players to buy low and risking being chided by Tim. The utter old tat that people buy in the hope of making a profit, Tim's little lecture at the halfway point, especially when it's a valuable piece and he has to don his white gloves. The gap in his teeth, the flirting with the female contestants, he's channeling Terri-Thomas so he is.

And it's nice and quiet, by comparison Loose Women is a terrible noisy farrago with rotten dress sense.

Well if you are at home with children (I work part time) and you've had a busy morning and you come back for lunch it's nice to have a bit of light relief while you are tidying, getting kids lunch, etc, etc.


And no I don't sit on my arse watching TV all day but in the middle of my often manic day it's a bit of fun in the background. Pls don't do the 'watching TV in the day' snob thing....I catch it for a half and hour maybe before afternoon activities commence. That's all it is.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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


> A repeat of Quincy? A repeat of Columbo? A repeat

> of Kojak? Anything else really would be better.


Don't mess with me on this one, 'Looch.. when it comes to the daytime TV schedules, you'd have to get up early in the day to get one over on me (well, you'd have to get up before 9 for sure).


Columbo is usually around a 3pm kick-off, and ITV4's nostalgiaZone is patchy (Randall and Hopkirk?.. piss off!)


Of course being blessed with Freeview, a hard drive recorder and a stack of DVDs, there's no reason to watch anything as dire as 'Loose Women' at all. However, this breaks the golden rule of watching daytime telly: it has to be vacuous enough so that you can pretend you've just got it on in the background whilst you get on with your important daily tasks (ie nail clipping, yakking on phone, moving vases around pointlessly etc)

Surely Wimbledon is the ne plus ultra of day time telly? A state of semi-suspended sloth can be maintained for hours listening to the whap and flap of the ball on string, watching the white shapes float left and right, right and left. Occasionally something will stir as a tanned, slab-legged Serbian chases down a dying drop shot. But not enough to sustain any real interest.


Dead-rubber cricket Tests heading to pre-determined draws are also up there, albeit without the added Serbian titillation.

emc Wrote:

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

> I too resent the 'past it' comment - I'm nearing

> 40 and don't feel (or indeed look so am often

> told) much different to late twenties, early

> thirties. I've got a big group of girlfriends and

> we discuss Loose Women type stuff but loads of

> other stuff too - politics, world events,

> whatever, along with the usual loose women stuff

> - kids, sex, how crap men can be, make-up, losing

> weight, counsel on each other's personal traumas

> (if needs be!) etc, etc.

>

> That's why I like the show, it makes me feel warm

> and fuzzy and makes me laugh out loud....I work a

> few floors down from the show at ITV and if there

> was a job going on it I'd be there like a shot!

>

> If you don't like it, bloomin' well turn over or

> turn off.

>

> And yes Carol was married to Chris Evans, but now

> engaged to toy boy researcher she met on the show

> - good on her!


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


That's us told then !



W**F

I have self-analysed why I should not like this programme and I've come to the conclusion that there's nothing wrong in eaves-dropping on women having a good old natter. Besides, it may help me to unravel the mysteries of the female mind - though on reflection this may be too optimistic. It may raise more questions than answers....

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

    • That's the milquetoast triangulation that's delivered so much electoral success to the Lib Dems locally and nationally! 🤣
    • Amazing. Now could you cut and paste an AI summary of the defence case for Andrew M-W? 
    • I would like to understand this promise by the Greens in greater detail and how it applies locally? Presumably road/pavement upkeep and renewal is as important for cyclists and pedestrians as motorists? I am not aware of plans to build new roads locally but there has been plenty of money spent on converting roads into pedestrian only areas. On the face of it this feels a slightly empty statement, when applied at local level. I'd love to know the Greens stance in hiring out parks for private use (given impact on park environment), I'd also like to understand their stance on fireworks- I will look to see if I can find anything. I don't know if a manifesto exists under the documents section of Southwark Greens, but you can only access that bit by signing in- which is disappointing. If anyone has a manifesto that reflects local priorities- could they post a link?
    • You are most likely correct in thinking that  Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew it.  But they obviously thought that his skills, abilities and usefulness far outweighed the negatives. Here is a summary of the positives lifted from elsewhere:-   1. Strategic Architect: He was a primary architect of "New Labour," rebranding the party and shifting its core ideology to win the 1997 general election. 2 Master of Communication: Often called the original "spin doctor," he revolutionised how political parties manage the media. He famously created the "grid" system to coordinate government messaging. 3 Networking and Charm: Known as "Silvertongue," he possesses a peerless ability to charm and network with high-level global figures, including business leaders and heads of state. 4. Governance and Trade Expertise: Beyond strategy, he was considered a highly efficient minister, serving as European Commissioner for Trade and Secretary of State across multiple departments, including Business and Northern Ireland.  5. Reinvention: His capacity to adapt to changing political climates and rebuild relationships reflects personal resilience and strategic flexibility. With his skill and abilities, he delivered results for all his bosses. In the short time in Washington, he found a way to get on the right side of Trump - despite him  being critical of Trump in previous years. That said he is complex personality.  He can be simultaneously brilliant and arrogant, thick-skinned yet sensitive, and selfless for his party while appearing narcissistic in his personal dealings.  My OP asked if he would be accepted over the pond. It turned out he was because he got on famously with trump. He worked out the correct strategy to get on the good side of Trump and secured a better trade deal than the EU and other nations.    
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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