Best Of

CHECK FOR ACCREDITATION, PART TWO

Good morning @NigelB, @Barnesian, @Phil, @kinabalu, @Cyclefree, @kyf_100

In my upcoming trans article (with discussant contributions from kyf_100 and Cyclefree, currently being pre-read by Taz and Andy_JS), another of the appendices (appendix 6) contains a list of comments prior to the article being written. In that discussion we see the following text...

@viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337029/#Comment_5337029
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337049/#Comment_5337049
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337052/#Comment_5337052
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337053/#Comment_5337053
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337054/#Comment_5337054
@NigelB
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337057/#Comment_5337057
@Barnesian
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336716/#Comment_5336716
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336711/#Comment_5336711
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336732/#Comment_5336732
@Phil
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336721/#Comment_5336721
@Kinabalu
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336695#Comment_5336695
@Cyclefree vs @Viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5381803#Comment_5381803
@Cyclefree
See also https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/11/17/the-scottish-playbook/
@kyf_100
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379283/#Comment_5379283
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379284/#Comment_5379284

If you want your identities to be partially obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281

...or totally obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]

...just let me know before 9pm today please.

This will be the most boring article ever published in the history of the Internet but I've come up with a snappy title to leaven the doughy misery of reading the fucking thing - "The Transgina Monologues".

As predicted.

No, @Dura_Ace is right, this sounds like the most monumentally boring thing in the Anthropocene Era, the only thing Dura got wrong is the name. It should be The Mangina Monologues, as that is funnier and it alliterates

Impressively, that manages to be both needlessly nasty and stratigraphically illiterate.
Strictly speaking, we’re in the Holocene Epoch of the Quaternary Period, not the ‘Anthropocene Era’.

Impressively you manage to get your pompous correction completely and pompously incorrect

"What is the Anthropocene and why does it matter?"


https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-the-anthropocene.html?utm_source=google&utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=grants&gad_source=1

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/anthropocene/

"The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to describe the most recent period in Earth’s history when human activity started to have a significant impact on the planet’s climate and ecosystems."

Still digging, I see. Your original claim was “Anthropocene Era”, which is wrong.
Even on the most generous reading, Anthropocene is only used informally as an unofficial epoch, not an era.
Quietly changing the geological unit after the fact is correction by sleight of hand, not accuracy.

WTF are you on about now? You denied that the concept of "the Anthropocene" even existed, I showed you it did, now you're quibbling about era versus epoch to hide your tiny shrivelled testicles of shame

That last line actually made me spit out some tea and laugh out loud, bravo.

If I may continue pompously, I didn’t deny the existence of the Anthropocene, only that it isn't an era. However, I grant that I wrote it clumsily enough that your reading was a fair one.

What would PB be without a pinch of pomposity and a smidge of ambiguity?

Ah, good. I'm glad you've taken my slight against your testicles in good spirit. This is what makes PB special, we can insult each other's genitals and laugh about it later

BTW I do wish @viewcode well in his Trans Trilogy, the Ring Cycle of Misgendering, or whatever it is he (they?) is planning, but it is not surprising that some of us view a "20,000 word article" on this subject with less-than-eager anticipation

Quite. PB remains one of the few places where a man’s testicles can be traduced at 1pm and his argument fairly assessed by 2pm.

On the article, I think “20,000 words” is less an invitation than a warning label, whatever the topic.

I recall, and think I'll always recall, a furious spat between Nigel Foremain and IshmaelZ that ran for three days and by the end was basically the two of them taking turns to denigrate the size of the other's penis. PB at its most raw.

And presumably with no actual evidence, like all the best spats on PB.

CHECK FOR ACCREDITATION, PART TWO

Good morning @NigelB, @Barnesian, @Phil, @kinabalu, @Cyclefree, @kyf_100

In my upcoming trans article (with discussant contributions from kyf_100 and Cyclefree, currently being pre-read by Taz and Andy_JS), another of the appendices (appendix 6) contains a list of comments prior to the article being written. In that discussion we see the following text...

@viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337029/#Comment_5337029
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337049/#Comment_5337049
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337052/#Comment_5337052
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337053/#Comment_5337053
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337054/#Comment_5337054
@NigelB
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337057/#Comment_5337057
@Barnesian
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336716/#Comment_5336716
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336711/#Comment_5336711
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336732/#Comment_5336732
@Phil
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336721/#Comment_5336721
@Kinabalu
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336695#Comment_5336695
@Cyclefree vs @Viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5381803#Comment_5381803
@Cyclefree
See also https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/11/17/the-scottish-playbook/
@kyf_100
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379283/#Comment_5379283
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379284/#Comment_5379284

If you want your identities to be partially obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281

...or totally obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]

...just let me know before 9pm today please.

This will be the most boring article ever published in the history of the Internet but I've come up with a snappy title to leaven the doughy misery of reading the fucking thing - "The Transgina Monologues".

As predicted.

No, @Dura_Ace is right, this sounds like the most monumentally boring thing in the Anthropocene Era, the only thing Dura got wrong is the name. It should be The Mangina Monologues, as that is funnier and it alliterates

Impressively, that manages to be both needlessly nasty and stratigraphically illiterate.
Strictly speaking, we’re in the Holocene Epoch of the Quaternary Period, not the ‘Anthropocene Era’.

Impressively you manage to get your pompous correction completely and pompously incorrect

"What is the Anthropocene and why does it matter?"


https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-the-anthropocene.html?utm_source=google&utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=grants&gad_source=1

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/anthropocene/

"The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to describe the most recent period in Earth’s history when human activity started to have a significant impact on the planet’s climate and ecosystems."

Still digging, I see. Your original claim was “Anthropocene Era”, which is wrong.
Even on the most generous reading, Anthropocene is only used informally as an unofficial epoch, not an era.
Quietly changing the geological unit after the fact is correction by sleight of hand, not accuracy.

WTF are you on about now? You denied that the concept of "the Anthropocene" even existed, I showed you it did, now you're quibbling about era versus epoch to hide your tiny shrivelled testicles of shame

That last line actually made me spit out some tea and laugh out loud, bravo.

If I may continue pompously, I didn’t deny the existence of the Anthropocene, only that it isn't an era. However, I grant that I wrote it clumsily enough that your reading was a fair one.

What would PB be without a pinch of pomposity and a smidge of ambiguity?

Ah, good. I'm glad you've taken my slight against your testicles in good spirit. This is what makes PB special, we can insult each other's genitals and laugh about it later

BTW I do wish @viewcode well in his Trans Trilogy, the Ring Cycle of Misgendering, or whatever it is he (they?) is planning, but it is not surprising that some of us view a "20,000 word article" on this subject with less-than-eager anticipation

I sat through five hours of Tristan and Isolde in Edinburgh on Wednesday, and while it was great, just occasionally you felt that a five minute executive summary and three crisp bullet point conclusions wouldn't come amiss.

A friends of ours, who died three years ago, had a mission in life to convert everyone to a love of Wagner. In his memory we bought a DVD of Tristan and Isolde. We watched the 1st Act, which was looong. My husband and I decided to leave it a couple of years before we watched the 2nd Act but haven't yet found the will to go back.

Are there any Wagner enthusiasts who can recommend one of his works which is more accessible (and shorter)?

Wagner is fantastic on heroin

I had a classical music friend who got free tickets to the Royal Opera House in his job. Also he was into heroin, like me

We smoked a ten bag each then went to see Tristan - all 109 hours or whatever - and it was glorious. At times I nodded out for an hour or two but it didn’t matter. I woke to find the same people shrieking the same beautiful music. And it went on and on

It was genuinely sublime. I appreciate “take heroin if you’re going to see a Wagner opera” is not massively practical advice. But maybe you’ve got a good dealer

If not, the Green Party will organise one for you.

Sky

Petrol Retailers Association, looking at short term measures, have withdrawn from a meeting with Reeves due to inflammatory language used by government minister's which has led to incidents of retail staff bring abused by the public

Snowflakes

Happy to screw all motorists but can't stand being told to play fair

You happy with retail staff being abused ?

This is a very weak argument. The responsibility for being abusive to retail staff lies solely with the abuser, not with the government, the retailer, the oil companies, anyone else. You're effectively excusing that behaviour by making such a point.

That depends though. If people incite the act, then they surely bear some responsibility.

Like that idiot who wanted people to burn migrant hotels.

Which is why there is centuries of legal precedent on the concept of incitement.

Remember Uncle Malmesbury's simple rules for not bing a racist - 4 tricks that Prosecution Lawyers don't want you to know!

1) Don't set immigrants on fire
2) Not even small ones
3) Especially not small ones
4) Don't advocate setting fire to immigrants

CHECK FOR ACCREDITATION, PART TWO

Good morning @NigelB, @Barnesian, @Phil, @kinabalu, @Cyclefree, @kyf_100

In my upcoming trans article (with discussant contributions from kyf_100 and Cyclefree, currently being pre-read by Taz and Andy_JS), another of the appendices (appendix 6) contains a list of comments prior to the article being written. In that discussion we see the following text...

@viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337029/#Comment_5337029
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337049/#Comment_5337049
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337052/#Comment_5337052
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337053/#Comment_5337053
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337054/#Comment_5337054
@NigelB
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337057/#Comment_5337057
@Barnesian
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336716/#Comment_5336716
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336711/#Comment_5336711
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336732/#Comment_5336732
@Phil
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336721/#Comment_5336721
@Kinabalu
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336695#Comment_5336695
@Cyclefree vs @Viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5381803#Comment_5381803
@Cyclefree
See also https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/11/17/the-scottish-playbook/
@kyf_100
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379283/#Comment_5379283
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379284/#Comment_5379284

If you want your identities to be partially obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281

...or totally obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]

...just let me know before 9pm today please.

This will be the most boring article ever published in the history of the Internet but I've come up with a snappy title to leaven the doughy misery of reading the fucking thing - "The Transgina Monologues".

As predicted.

No, @Dura_Ace is right, this sounds like the most monumentally boring thing in the Anthropocene Era, the only thing Dura got wrong is the name. It should be The Mangina Monologues, as that is funnier and it alliterates

Impressively, that manages to be both needlessly nasty and stratigraphically illiterate.
Strictly speaking, we’re in the Holocene Epoch of the Quaternary Period, not the ‘Anthropocene Era’.

Impressively you manage to get your pompous correction completely and pompously incorrect

"What is the Anthropocene and why does it matter?"


https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-the-anthropocene.html?utm_source=google&utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=grants&gad_source=1

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/anthropocene/

"The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to describe the most recent period in Earth’s history when human activity started to have a significant impact on the planet’s climate and ecosystems."

Still digging, I see. Your original claim was “Anthropocene Era”, which is wrong.
Even on the most generous reading, Anthropocene is only used informally as an unofficial epoch, not an era.
Quietly changing the geological unit after the fact is correction by sleight of hand, not accuracy.

WTF are you on about now? You denied that the concept of "the Anthropocene" even existed, I showed you it did, now you're quibbling about era versus epoch to hide your tiny shrivelled testicles of shame

That last line actually made me spit out some tea and laugh out loud, bravo.

If I may continue pompously, I didn’t deny the existence of the Anthropocene, only that it isn't an era. However, I grant that I wrote it clumsily enough that your reading was a fair one.

What would PB be without a pinch of pomposity and a smidge of ambiguity?

Ah, good. I'm glad you've taken my slight against your testicles in good spirit. This is what makes PB special, we can insult each other's genitals and laugh about it later

BTW I do wish @viewcode well in his Trans Trilogy, the Ring Cycle of Misgendering, or whatever it is he (they?) is planning, but it is not surprising that some of us view a "20,000 word article" on this subject with less-than-eager anticipation

I sat through five hours of Tristan and Isolde in Edinburgh on Wednesday, and while it was great, just occasionally you felt that a five minute executive summary and three crisp bullet point conclusions wouldn't come amiss.

A friends of ours, who died three years ago, had a mission in life to convert everyone to a love of Wagner. In his memory we bought a DVD of Tristan and Isolde. We watched the 1st Act, which was looong. My husband and I decided to leave it a couple of years before we watched the 2nd Act but haven't yet found the will to go back.

Are there any Wagner enthusiasts who can recommend one of his works which is more accessible (and shorter)?

Wagner is fantastic on heroin

I had a classical music friend who got free tickets to the Royal Opera House in his job. Also he was into heroin, like me

We smoked a ten bag each then went to see Tristan - all 109 hours or whatever - and it was glorious. At times I nodded out for an hour or two but it didn’t matter. I woke to find the same people shrieking the same beautiful music. And it went on and on

It was genuinely sublime. I appreciate “take heroin if you’re going to see a Wagner opera” is not massively practical advice. But maybe you’ve got a good dealer

CHECK FOR ACCREDITATION, PART TWO

Good morning @NigelB, @Barnesian, @Phil, @kinabalu, @Cyclefree, @kyf_100

In my upcoming trans article (with discussant contributions from kyf_100 and Cyclefree, currently being pre-read by Taz and Andy_JS), another of the appendices (appendix 6) contains a list of comments prior to the article being written. In that discussion we see the following text...

@viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337029/#Comment_5337029
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337049/#Comment_5337049
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337052/#Comment_5337052
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337053/#Comment_5337053
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337054/#Comment_5337054
@NigelB
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5337057/#Comment_5337057
@Barnesian
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336716/#Comment_5336716
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336711/#Comment_5336711
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336732/#Comment_5336732
@Phil
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336721/#Comment_5336721
@Kinabalu
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5336695#Comment_5336695
@Cyclefree vs @Viewcode
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5381803#Comment_5381803
@Cyclefree
See also https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/11/17/the-scottish-playbook/
@kyf_100
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379283/#Comment_5379283
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379284/#Comment_5379284

If you want your identities to be partially obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5379281/#Comment_5379281

...or totally obscured (like this)...

[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]

...just let me know before 9pm today please.

This will be the most boring article ever published in the history of the Internet but I've come up with a snappy title to leaven the doughy misery of reading the fucking thing - "The Transgina Monologues".

As predicted.

No, @Dura_Ace is right, this sounds like the most monumentally boring thing in the Anthropocene Era, the only thing Dura got wrong is the name. It should be The Mangina Monologues, as that is funnier and it alliterates

Impressively, that manages to be both needlessly nasty and stratigraphically illiterate.
Strictly speaking, we’re in the Holocene Epoch of the Quaternary Period, not the ‘Anthropocene Era’.

Impressively you manage to get your pompous correction completely and pompously incorrect

"What is the Anthropocene and why does it matter?"


https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-the-anthropocene.html?utm_source=google&utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=grants&gad_source=1

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/anthropocene/

"The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to describe the most recent period in Earth’s history when human activity started to have a significant impact on the planet’s climate and ecosystems."

Still digging, I see. Your original claim was “Anthropocene Era”, which is wrong.
Even on the most generous reading, Anthropocene is only used informally as an unofficial epoch, not an era.
Quietly changing the geological unit after the fact is correction by sleight of hand, not accuracy.

WTF are you on about now? You denied that the concept of "the Anthropocene" even existed, I showed you it did, now you're quibbling about era versus epoch to hide your tiny shrivelled testicles of shame

That last line actually made me spit out some tea and laugh out loud, bravo.

If I may continue pompously, I didn’t deny the existence of the Anthropocene, only that it isn't an era. However, I grant that I wrote it clumsily enough that your reading was a fair one.

What would PB be without a pinch of pomposity and a smidge of ambiguity?

Ah, good. I'm glad you've taken my slight against your testicles in good spirit. This is what makes PB special, we can insult each other's genitals and laugh about it later

BTW I do wish @viewcode well in his Trans Trilogy, the Ring Cycle of Misgendering, or whatever it is he (they?) is planning, but it is not surprising that some of us view a "20,000 word article" on this subject with less-than-eager anticipation

Quite. PB remains one of the few places where a man’s testicles can be traduced at 1pm and his argument fairly assessed by 2pm.

On the article, I think “20,000 words” is less an invitation than a warning label, whatever the topic.

I recall, and think I'll always recall, a furious spat between Nigel Foremain and IshmaelZ that ran for three days and by the end was basically the two of them taking turns to denigrate the size of the other's penis. PB at its most raw.

Malcolm and Foremain didn't get on either. I found him quite inoffensive (Foremain not Malcolm).

Nobody could ever accuse malcy of being quite inoffensive...

Sky

Petrol Retailers Association, looking at short term measures, have withdrawn from a meeting with Reeves due to inflammatory language used by government minister's which has led to incidents of retail staff bring abused by the public

Snowflakes

Happy to screw all motorists but can't stand being told to play fair

You happy with retail staff being abused ?

This is a very weak argument. The responsibility for being abusive to retail staff lies solely with the abuser, not with the government, the retailer, the oil companies, anyone else. You're effectively excusing that behaviour by making such a point.

That depends though. If people incite the act, then they surely bear some responsibility.

Like that idiot who wanted people to burn migrant hotels.

The government has not asked people to abuse retail workers, FFS. And that's a pretty dark logic - you wouldn't want to extend that to the Iran war, for example.

If you shout fire in a crowded cinema are you responsible for the subsequent crush that kills people?