Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ted Max Wrote:

"Possibly" Off-Topic but its like yesterday when myfriend, accidently, broke the microwave plate. Was she handing you your arse on it at the time, Tony?


Still "polite and funny" at the same time Maxie.


Thats why you'll always be The Forum favourite...your certainly mine M8;-)

the fact that annaj CONTINUED reading DESPITE her assertion that she found the experience "really unpleasant" seems, to me anyway, a little unconvincing


Oh, honestly, Ladymuck, I can't believe I'm bothering to answer this, but since you seem to be implying that I either masochistically forced myself to repeatedly check a thread I didn't like, or that I'm lying and it didn't really offend me, but I reported it anyway, either of which would be frankly a bit bonkers, I feel compelled to respond.


Here's how it was: I kept an eye on the original thread, because I thought it was interesting, but I noticed it was starting to go down hill a bit. I then went away for a bit and did something else, you know life stuff, and later came back to look at the forum. I noticed there had been lots of activity on the thread, so I read through all the posts since I'd last read it. As I read them I was troubled by an increasing feeling that it all felt a bit wrong to me, so I posted to that effect and reported the posts to the moderator. Then I went away and got on with my life. That doesn't seem that unconvincing or weird to me.


Please, can you just accept that I, and others, think that on this occasion a joke went too far and get over it.


Now...


Surely then, it's all the fault of the women who buy these trashy mags


I know you were joking, but there may well be something in that.


But I'm only allowing myself and half hour lunch break before it's back to the books, so we'll have to discuss that one another time.

I'd be interested in joining you for that debate, as I have serious concerns about magazines like Heat and Reveal and Closer and so on and on and on


But I am freelancing so need to do some actual work


And also, I need to do some actual work on my seeming (seems madam?) joylessness

I think this thread has been blown out of proportion a little bit.


There is nothing new or controversial about a bunch of guys letching over female TV presenters, and teasing each other over their tastes. Women are no better, a lot of the time.


The real controversy is that there appears to be different selection criteria for male and female news readers.

Moos Wrote:

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

> I agree, Daizie. Any woman that would prefer to

> see other women being selected for their jobs

> based on their qualifications rather than their

> tits clearly just needs a good seeing-to. Well

> said.


But Moos, surely for any woman going for a job as a 'Page 3 stunna' that's just confusing...


(though I suspect most 'Page 3 stunnas' would even find tying their shoelaces confusing).

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of Smoke Control law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all per se, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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