This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
A couple more thoughts on the proposal to develop desecrate the Yorkshire Dales… giving free rein to developers to create holiday homes or retirement homes for wealthy outsiders will help neither Julian Smith nor the Conservatives on NYCC to keep their seats… having said that, it will further enrich the landowners that are the bedrock of the Tories in this part of the world…
Irony is it would be local occupancy only - but that doesn't solve the problem when they are S106 houses for sale for over £500,000
The conversion for local occupancy only rules are dead easy to get around.
In the Dales? Do tell how - not that I want to live there for reasons....
It’s time BartyBobbins to accept that he has the aesthetic and cultural sense of a spastic frog, and to leave discussions around national heritage to everyone else.
Crass. No doubt people with cerebral palsy are cheered by the fact that there are still some who find their condition an appropriate insult.
Do you know any spastic frogs? Are they easily offended, as a rule?
Even so: best not used, for the reason given.
Suggest 'pithed frog'. What is, or used to be, done to frogs in A level biology etc.
Don’t be so feeble. Spastic, like retarded, is due for a revival.
Nobody knows what pithed means. I still don’t, despite reading your post.
Stick to your guns. Spastic is a brilliant term of abuse because it can be SPAT out with venom. SPASTIC
It is deeply satisfying
I am old enough to remember the Spastics Society charity shop before they rebranded.
1994 isn't that long ago.
It's nearly thirty years, Andy...
I've just been watching the 1959 election show, so 1994 seems pretty modern compared to that.
You and I should do a tour of motorway service stations. I can point out the subtly unique aspects of each one, then at the end I'll rank them, best to least good, and see if you agree.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I was astonished when I read it. Astounded.
That is only (a) a blog (b) a personal comment and (c) a very brief one, not an exhibition. It's more about what one might be missing when looking at the obvious story. It's not even being used for exhibiton labels.
Yet GW and CR regard it as the end of days ...
Similar things can be - and should be, and are - written about poverty, or slavery, or wealth, implicit in museum collections and surviving objects. (For instance, how much a Victorian woman's dress cost, and the implications for those who worked on it.) It's standard social history and nothing new in it.
Check out this re: The Woke Menace, from noted sporting commentator:
NYT ($) - Trump Cheers the Defeat of Rapinoe and the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team The former president taunted a U.S. team after its defeat on the world stage.
When the United States lost to Sweden in the Women’s World Cup on Sunday, many American viewers saw it as a painful collapse on the grandest stage — the sort of agonizing moment that happens in sports.
For former President Donald J. Trump, it was a sign of national decline.
The loss was “fully emblematic of what is happening to the our once great Nation under Crooked Joe Biden,” Mr. Trump wrote on his social media platform.
“Many of our players were openly hostile to America — No other country behaved in such a manner, or even close,” he added. “WOKE EQUALS FAILURE. Nice shot Megan, the USA is going to Hell!!! MAGA.”
The taunt was an extension of a longstanding feud between Mr. Trump and Megan Rapinoe, the retiring soccer star who once refused to visit the Trump White House, and whose missed penalty kick contributed to the team’s loss. . . .
But it was also a striking example of the unforgiving moment in right-wing politics, when a former president will taunt an American team competing on the international stage and relish the agony of its defeat.
SSI - No wonder so many who are obsessed with the Woke Menace are pimping for Trump, Putin, etc.
Do note that #45 is actually working both sides of Woke Street, by mocking Megan Rapinoe for being super-Woke . . . and Ron DeSantis for being super anti-Woke!
Very similar to his tap-dancing re: Ukraine.
Megan Rapinoe represented her country for many years with apparent brilliance and skill. She helped the team she was in win many matches and competitions - she even got the Golden Boot and Golden Ball in 2019.
Yet one missed kick and she's EVIL in the eyes of many I've seen on Twitter.
Let's be honest. It was not about that kick. It's about the fact she's gay and will not quietly and meekly submit.
Instead of congratulating her for her work over the years, and perhaps lamenting that this might have been one tournament to many, she's absolutely slated. By shits.
By right-wing, anti-Woke, shits posing as "patriots".
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I was astonished when I read it. Astounded.
That is only (a) a blog (b) a personal comment and (c) a very brief one, not an exhibition. It's more about what one might be missing when looking at the obvious story. It's not even being used for exhibiton labels.
Yet GW and CR regard it as the end of days ...
Similar things can be - and should be, and are - written about poverty, or slavery, or wealth, implicit in museum collections and surviving objects. (For instance, how much a Victorian woman's dress cost, and the implications for those who worked on it.) It's standard social history and nothing new in it.
Check out this re: The Woke Menace, from noted sporting commentator:
NYT ($) - Trump Cheers the Defeat of Rapinoe and the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team The former president taunted a U.S. team after its defeat on the world stage.
When the United States lost to Sweden in the Women’s World Cup on Sunday, many American viewers saw it as a painful collapse on the grandest stage — the sort of agonizing moment that happens in sports.
For former President Donald J. Trump, it was a sign of national decline.
The loss was “fully emblematic of what is happening to the our once great Nation under Crooked Joe Biden,” Mr. Trump wrote on his social media platform.
“Many of our players were openly hostile to America — No other country behaved in such a manner, or even close,” he added. “WOKE EQUALS FAILURE. Nice shot Megan, the USA is going to Hell!!! MAGA.”
The taunt was an extension of a longstanding feud between Mr. Trump and Megan Rapinoe, the retiring soccer star who once refused to visit the Trump White House, and whose missed penalty kick contributed to the team’s loss. . . .
But it was also a striking example of the unforgiving moment in right-wing politics, when a former president will taunt an American team competing on the international stage and relish the agony of its defeat.
SSI - No wonder so many who are obsessed with the Woke Menace are pimping for Trump, Putin, etc.
Do note that #45 is actually working both sides of Woke Street, by mocking Megan Rapinoe for being super-Woke . . . and Ron DeSantis for being super anti-Woke!
Very similar to his tap-dancing re: Ukraine.
Trump and Trumpers are the ultimate in Identity Politics.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
London may be a shit-hole, but it's OUR shit-hole!
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
OK, who had "the woke want to build concentration camps" on their bingo card?
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
You just can't accept you're infected by it.
That's how bad it is.
You're the idiot, not me.
Infected by what? Go on, define what I am infected by, and how I represent it.
As for being an idiot: yes, I am. Sometimes. Not all of the time, or I hope, much of the time. And I try to learn.
But I am not an idiot in a core belief I fear you do not share: let people be who they want to be, as long as they do not hurt other people (and hurt feelings is not hurt).
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Yes, we have lost organised religion but a lot of modern Woke has its roots in more puritan aspects of our religious heritage and we see that playing out today.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
PS. There are plenty of examples in history, particularly with ancient civilisations of "queer identity" without having to make it up. Roman butt plugs, for example, may be found in the British Museum!
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
*I'm* hysterical?
LOL. I'm laughing. At you.
Read your own posts if you want to see hysteria and small-mindedness.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
Look, you just cannot laugh "at and with" that tweet, because it is (member of) one group seriously deriding another, and you have to pick sides. It's not just banter. You seem to just completely suspend the power of critical thought, and you think LGBTQ, Rainbows, flowers, progressiveness, Pride, I'm in because I'm such a decent human being!!! And when it's pointed out to you that your fellow bandwagoneers include people who castrate boys for being gay, you just think it's a real downer to have your mellow harshed in that way, and put it out of your mind. Or perhaps that woman is just one bad apple? You really need to have a good long think about whether the mutilation of children is good or bad, and pay less attention to the fancy banners on the bandwagon.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
*I'm* hysterical?
LOL. I'm laughing. At you.
Read your own posts if you want to see hysteria and small-mindedness.
"if we …dismiss any hope of a Conservative recovery"
That's the stupidest premise for an "analysis" that I've read for quite some time.
Let me guess...Ben Walker thought Theresa May was going to wallop Labour in the 2017 election?
How defeatist the Tories must be feeling, what with immigration being an issue that belongs to Labour and is driven by Labour and on which it is so hard for the Tories to get their point of view across, what with the gutter press being so pro-Labour, and what with there being a rich vein of pro-immigrant feeling in the country that's so easy for Labour to tap into.
Even if the stupid premise had any sense in it, why does he think political parties put their guys into government ministries? If the Tory leadership thought it was a foregone conclusion that they'd lose the election, they'd call the election at the last possible moment. Government is about contracts. Filling pockets.
(Side note: have any specific contracts been mentioned in the ongoing Electoral Commission story, or is it just a "La Patrie En Danger" drill?)
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I can’t personally imagine myself living there nowadays (I did once want to, almost took a job down there, then life moved me in a different direction). What I would say anecdotally though from having friends in the capital is that social circles seem to tend to be pretty interesting and diverse, by virtue of proximity to a lot of other people doing rather interesting or well connected jobs. And it is exciting being in a big city, because, well it just is. Things happen in big cities.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
Yes, and genuinely gay men, like Philip Hensher, are incandescent with rage about it. You couldn't make my point more clearly for me if you tried with both hands for a century: you have no intellectual or moral engagement with the issue, it's just window dressing for your online and, for all I know, real life persona, and you don't understand why he is getting so wound up over what to the incurious and unengaged, like you, is a bit of a giggle.
Afternoon drinking in a proper pub, with the rain falling from dark clouds outside, shop lights reflecting in the puddles, is one of life's great pleasures.
I once spent 13 hours in the same pub, it was brilliant.
Was it 22nd August 1988? When, finally, pubs could stay open all day.
No it was in Scotland where licensing rules have always been saner. Probably around 1994 or something. Went in at noon, left at 1am. No special occasion or sports, just my mates, good chat, lots of beer. Happy days.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I've only ever heard Scottish people talk like that. Most people who live in London don't think London is either total shite or amazing. They don't think in stereotypes about themselves. They've got more intelligence than that.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
Yes, and genuinely gay men, like Philip Hensher, are incandescent with rage about it. You couldn't make my point more clearly for me if you tried with both hand for a century: you have no intellectual or moral engagement with the issue, it's just window dressing for your online and, for all I know, real life persona, and you don't understand why he is getting so wound up over what to the incurious and unengaged, like you, is a bit of a giggle.
May I have a link to Philip Hensher getting 'incandescent with rage' please?
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
That blog doesn't say that the MR was a Love Boat. It just points out some possible alternative interpretations that are easily forgotten.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up.
It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran a week-long event 3 weeks ago - article in the local paper and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't care to remember or want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The shameless self-promotion, the narcissism, the obsession with identity politics books (as if no other lessons can be learned from any other books) and the way he patronises his customers rather than tries to welcome them and service their need. He used to live in London/Brighton and moved here last year. He seems to generate nothing but eye rolls.
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I was astonished when I read it. Astounded.
That is only (a) a blog (b) a personal comment and (c) a very brief one, not an exhibition. It's more about what one might be missing when looking at the obvious story. It's not even being used for exhibiton labels.
Yet GW and CR regard it as the end of days ...
Similar things can be - and should be, and are - written about poverty, or slavery, or wealth, implicit in museum collections and surviving objects. (For instance, how much a Victorian woman's dress cost, and the implications for those who worked on it.) It's standard social history and nothing new in it.
Check out this re: The Woke Menace, from noted sporting commentator:
NYT ($) - Trump Cheers the Defeat of Rapinoe and the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team The former president taunted a U.S. team after its defeat on the world stage.
When the United States lost to Sweden in the Women’s World Cup on Sunday, many American viewers saw it as a painful collapse on the grandest stage — the sort of agonizing moment that happens in sports.
For former President Donald J. Trump, it was a sign of national decline.
The loss was “fully emblematic of what is happening to the our once great Nation under Crooked Joe Biden,” Mr. Trump wrote on his social media platform.
“Many of our players were openly hostile to America — No other country behaved in such a manner, or even close,” he added. “WOKE EQUALS FAILURE. Nice shot Megan, the USA is going to Hell!!! MAGA.”
The taunt was an extension of a longstanding feud between Mr. Trump and Megan Rapinoe, the retiring soccer star who once refused to visit the Trump White House, and whose missed penalty kick contributed to the team’s loss. . . .
But it was also a striking example of the unforgiving moment in right-wing politics, when a former president will taunt an American team competing on the international stage and relish the agony of its defeat.
SSI - No wonder so many who are obsessed with the Woke Menace are pimping for Trump, Putin, etc.
Do note that #45 is actually working both sides of Woke Street, by mocking Megan Rapinoe for being super-Woke . . . and Ron DeSantis for being super anti-Woke!
Very similar to his tap-dancing re: Ukraine.
Megan Rapinoe represented her country for many years with apparent brilliance and skill. She helped the team she was in win many matches and competitions - she even got the Golden Boot and Golden Ball in 2019.
Yet one missed kick and she's EVIL in the eyes of many I've seen on Twitter.
Let's be honest. It was not about that kick. It's about the fact she's gay and will not quietly and meekly submit.
Instead of congratulating her for her work over the years, and perhaps lamenting that this might have been one tournament to many, she's absolutely slated. By shits.
Yes. This is deeply unpleasant and reminiscent of the racist hatred that was expressed towards black English football players who missed penalties in a big match in 2021 - as if they deliberately failed to score for their team. Utterly insane to think like that, but...some people do.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
Look, you just cannot laugh "at and with" that tweet, because it is (member of) one group seriously deriding another, and you have to pick sides. It's not just banter. You seem to just completely suspend the power of critical thought, and you think LGBTQ, Rainbows, flowers, progressiveness, Pride, I'm in because I'm such a decent human being!!! And when it's pointed out to you that your fellow bandwagoneers include people who castrate boys for being gay, you just think it's a real downer to have your mellow harshed in that way, and put it out of your mind. Or perhaps that woman is just one bad apple? You really need to have a good long think about whether the mutilation of children is good or bad, and pay less attention to the fancy banners on the bandwagon.
OK, I'll pick that up. I've looked at the link (https://maryrose.org/blog/collections/the-collections-team/queering-the-mary-rose-s-collection/) and I did not see any reference to children, nor did I see anybody seriously deriding anybody. Your specific point about the castration of children is obviously correct but I don't see it carrying over to queer/trans people generally nor to that link. I found it ridiculously overextended but that's it.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
Yes, it is harmless.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I've only ever heard Scottish people talk like that. Most people who live in London don't think London is either total shite or amazing. They don't think in stereotypes about themselves. They've got more intelligence than that.
I am not sure whether you left you sense of analysis or irony at the door, but you will note that it was a response to my dear friend @Leon who said that those outside London were "existing" not "living". As he is a converted and convinced towny and I am a country bumpkin it was a form of banter. Sigh! At least @Sunil_Prasannan in Zone 4 understood!
A couple more thoughts on the proposal to develop desecrate the Yorkshire Dales… giving free rein to developers to create holiday homes or retirement homes for wealthy outsiders will help neither Julian Smith nor the Conservatives on NYCC to keep their seats… having said that, it will further enrich the landowners that are the bedrock of the Tories in this part of the world…
Irony is it would be local occupancy only - but that doesn't solve the problem when they are S106 houses for sale for over £500,000
Strangely, if you build enough houses, then people can afford to live in them.
Look at rural France.
The houses at that price haven't sold - it was priced for hope over reality....
The point being that if you build property in line with the population, £500k properties out in th
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
Yes, it is harmless.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
I think I might be aware it is not a modern thing. Please see my previous post on Roman butt plugs ffs.
(PS if you are sheltered enough to be not sure what one is I suggest you might not wish to google it)
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up.
It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran a week-long event 3 weeks ago - article in the local paper and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't care to remember or want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The shameless self-promotion, the narcissism, the obsession with identity politics books (as if no other lessons can be learned from any other books) and the way he patronises his customers rather than tries to welcome them and service their need. He used to live in London/Brighton and moved here last year. He seems to generate nothing but eye rolls.
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
It sells books. It is a bookshop.
There are a fair few 'Christian' bookshops around. They don't sell a full range of books. Neither did the railway-bookshop-slash-barbers I used to go to in Derby. It is still a bookshop. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. Getting angry about it is rather silly. I don't get wound up by Christian bookshops.
It’s time BartyBobbins to accept that he has the aesthetic and cultural sense of a spastic frog, and to leave discussions around national heritage to everyone else.
Crass. No doubt people with cerebral palsy are cheered by the fact that there are still some who find their condition an appropriate insult.
Do you know any spastic frogs? Are they easily offended, as a rule?
Even so: best not used, for the reason given.
Suggest 'pithed frog'. What is, or used to be, done to frogs in A level biology etc.
Don’t be so feeble. Spastic, like retarded, is due for a revival.
Nobody knows what pithed means. I still don’t, despite reading your post.
Stick to your guns. Spastic is a brilliant term of abuse because it can be SPAT out with venom. SPASTIC
It is deeply satisfying
It used to be Spaz when I was a kid. We also had Flid and Mong. The cruelty in those terms is quite something.
"Joey" as well
Ah, good old Joey Deacon, the celebrated Blue Peter Spastic, as was.
Terrible really. At some point in the 1990s there must have been a noticeable drop-off in boys who were given that name by their parents.
It was more the early 80s. When I was at school 90% of the insults had Joey in them
Sorry to bite on the trolling bait, but they are horrible terms which have correctly been largely binned off as insults. I for one am quite glad that words for shagging and body parts have become more mainstream and less offensive, as nasty words based on race and disability become much less acceptable.
Point of order on 'Joey' He died in 1981, the year I was born, and I never heard the term in the playground once (all the other ones above I certainly did).
I was born in 1974. I heard it all the time. Pretty horrible looking back. I remember we got called into an assembly when he died and one kid a few years above me got kicked out for laughing. I shudder at the memory.
Unfortunately, insults and bullying still take place.
Except, now, rather than being directly based on a form of "ist" they adopt different forms, like someone's physical appearance on social media, personality weaknesses, unfashionable views, their use of language, behaviours, or social skills..
When I goto a bar I normally drink in the dive pubs, inhabited by bikers, goths, punks and the socially abnormal. My observation from these bars as most have someone who frequents them that is disabled is that they treat them as people. An example is a pub I used to be a local to in slough, a guy was a regular...motorised wheelchair couldnt speak but could type on a keyboard. Seeing the hells angels gather round him and have the patience to wait while he typed shit out and include him restored some of my faith in humanity. No one would ever disrespect the guy
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
Tories need more like him. Instinctive politicians
I believe you can make such an order if and only if you can prove it was deliberately demolished. His letter rather pathetically skirts round the fact that he knows this perfectly well.
I think we can be fairly sure it was “deliberately demolished” as here is the footage of it being deliberately demolished by a great big JCB, a day after the fire.
This all smacks of panic to me. Someone torched it and was frightened by the massive online reaction which got police and politicians involved, now they’ve kicked off an even bigger reaction
It won’t go away now
Ah OK the JCB may have been a mistake. if they have any sense they will have a surveyor's report after the fire saying JFC this buiding is lethally dangerous and needs demolished asap. BUT the point about the Punch Bowl is that it was listed, this is not. Not even sure they needed to torch it, unless they were getting in quick ahead of a fast track listing application (if such a thing is possible).
The Georgian Group was pursuing a quick listing with the support of locals
You’ve got this wrong. It’s definitely a highly suspicious sequence of events. Which also implicates Marathon’s the brewers
No, you have got me wrong. I think it absolutely stinks, but I think they will get away with it.
Mind you it was a fugly building and I don't feel that its loss hugely diminishes me. If people valued it they should have drunk a lot of beer there on a regular basis, and it would still be a pub.
One of the reasons it became less popular as a pub is that there was strangely sustained campaign of fly-tipping alll around it, making it hard to access and sometimes unpleasant to visit: I actually learned that from Gavin Williamson's Facebook page. And then in recent months it was suspiciously attacked so that its kitchen and loos were almost unusable....
It sounds to me like these last few days have merely been the culmination of a years long process of making it unviable as a pub, so it will be sold, so it can then be torched and demolished, and then someone makes an absolute mint turning it all into housing
And for once we as a nation should say No, fuck that, and put these greedy c*nts in jail, as an example. Sorted
This is what's wrong with this country. The building wasn't listed, if the owners wanted to demolish it, they ought to just be able to send in bulldozers and it should be none of anyone else's business.
We have a chronic shortage of housing in this country and any time anyone suggests building on greenfield land people scream out no, redevelop brownfield instead.
Now there's a plot of brownfield land available for redevelopment and there is outrage at that too.
Which is it? Do you want green land developed? Or "brownfield" which means tearing down old buildings, just like this.
And if you want a pub to stay open, best bet is to go and drink there. Not never go then complain an establishment you never drank at has shut down.
I'm sure your UK would have incredible GDP figures. But it would utterly charmless, and the welfare of the people who live here no better (or even worse).
There does need to be some sort of concerted effort to save pubs, halls. There is a value in social cohesion that doesn't appear on a spreadsheet. For one, it means that you can escape your poxy flat or new build for a few hours.
If you want a concerted effort to save pubs, halls etc, then start by drinking in them. Frequent those establishments and provide them custom.
If you can't be bothered, then don't complain if they go out of business. Put your money where your mouth is and go buy a pint or two. Regularly.
If they had better cycle provision I'd be more likely to buy a pint.
But seriously - I am a regular pub goer and claim to have singlehandedly kept my local pizzeria going during lockdown. I just wish the pints were as cheap as the cans you can buy in Tesco.
Likewise, I love pubs. I am a regular in at least two around me - the Edinboro Castle and the York and Albany - and often stroll to others in Primrose Hill
I visit plenty of pubs further afield. Soho, Hampstead, Highgate, all over London, and I love a country pub, a coastal pub, a historic pub. I even like really down at heel sketchy pubs, they too can have intense character. As @Gardenwalker says, pubs are one of the best things about Britain, and anyone who goes around criminally tearing down 220 year old British pubs with amazing quirks will feel the wrath of many - and rightly
One main reason I haven't drunk in the Crooked House is because I have never been to South Staffs (at least as far as I can recall) so have never had the chance. A stupid argument
I guess the mistske isn't yours then, but that is clearly one pub that needs to be burned down in the interests of Anglo-Scottish relations. Typical North London idiocy.
"The Edinboro Castle is a poncy pub with poncy interior decor and full of poncy people. Somebody else may well say it's a stylish cool pub with stylish cool decor and stylish cool people. So it's horses for courses. But at somepoint - probably when somebody decided to change the name from the "Edinburgh Castle" to the "Edinboro Castle", it became poncy. The other give away is that with their fish & chips (beer battered haddock and "skin-on" chips???) they don't do mushy peas. They do "crushed peas". See what I mean?
... The Edinboro Castle ticks all the "nice" boxes, but I think everything about is poncy, contrived, superficial and self-satisfied. If you're any of those you'll probably quite like it."
Fucking "Nunhead" doesn't even count as London. It's so far south and drearily suburban it's basically Kent or Surrey or Who Cares. I have literally never been to Nunhead and have zero desire to do so. UGH. It makes me want to vomit just thinking about it. NUNHEAD. lol. PUKE
And yours hasn't got a massive beer garden. And it's not in groovy Camden, 2 minutes from Regent's Park
FAIL
It does actually have quite a substantial multi-tiered beer garden. It is two minutes from Telegraph Hill Park, the "new Hampstead Heath" according to the Daily Mail, which of a summer evening throngs with beautiful people (Goldsmiths students and the like). And to be honest Skehans isn't actually in Nunhead, it's in Telegraph Hill and has a New Cross postcode. And it is the best pub in London, and does excellent Thai food, none of your crushed peas and beer battered cod (yawn, so basic). So your loss!
I'm imagining a crushed pea.
'You're not guacamole you're just a BLOODY PEA!'
Peas and avocado smashed with garlic and lime is very nice actually.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
Yes, it is harmless.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
Not least bevcause that 'nonsense' blog doesn't say that about that form of hanky-panky being rife. Indeed, it *Makes the point* that we can't know what the crew's sexuality, temporary, permanent, or pished, was.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I've only ever heard Scottish people talk like that. Most people who live in London don't think London is either total shite or amazing. They don't think in stereotypes about themselves. They've got more intelligence than that.
I am not sure whether you left you sense of analysis or irony at the door, but you will note that it was a response to my dear friend @Leon who said that those outside London were "existing" not "living". As he is a converted and convinced towny and I am a country bumpkin it was a form of banter. Sigh! At least @Sunil_Prasannan in Zone 4 understood!
Ah - OK I tend not to read Leonist paeans to (part of the inner part of) London.
I'm a Londoner who unfortunately doesn't live there any more. When I did live there, I felt if anything sorry for those among the non-Londoners who came to live there who kept going on about how great a city it was and suggesting they were so cool to live in it. People who are actually from London rarely do that.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I can’t personally imagine myself living there nowadays (I did once want to, almost took a job down there, then life moved me in a different direction). What I would say anecdotally though from having friends in the capital is that social circles seem to tend to be pretty interesting and diverse, by virtue of proximity to a lot of other people doing rather interesting or well connected jobs. And it is exciting being in a big city, because, well it just is. Things happen in big cities.
I couldn't disagree with your analysis. My comment was a tongue in cheek teasing of @Leon and may not be entirely representative of my real views.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
You just can't accept you're infected by it.
That's how bad it is.
You're the idiot, not me.
You’ve just lost your shit over a blog post. Take a look in the mirror.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up. It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran an event 3 weeks ago - local paper, and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends. He used to live in London/Brighton and generates nothing but eye rolls here.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up.
It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran a week-long event 3 weeks ago - article in the local paper and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't care to remember or want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The shameless self-promotion, the narcissism, the obsession with identity politics books (as if no other lessons can be learned from any other books) and the way he patronises his customers rather than tries to welcome them and service their need. He used to live in London/Brighton and moved here last year. He seems to generate nothing but eye rolls.
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
It sells books. It is a bookshop.
There are a fair few 'Christian' bookshops around. They don't sell a full range of books. Neither did the railway-bookshop-slash-barbers I used to go to in Derby. It is still a bookshop. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. Getting angry about it is rather silly. I don't get wound up by Christian bookshops.
Such bookshops label themselves as such. This guy is purporting to be neutral and offering a community service.
If he labelled his shop a 'Wokeshop' or, more realistically, a 'Diversity' bookshop then that would be more honest.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
Yes, it is harmless.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
I think I might be aware it is not a modern thing. Please see my previous post on Roman butt plugs ffs.
(PS if you are sheltered enough to be not sure what one is I suggest you might not wish to google it)
Talking about things you shouldn't google, may I suggest this:
I try to get the waiter's attention by blinking in morse code Why are you blinking so much? I've got something in my eye Here, let me get it out No, thank you, I don't wanna die
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
Can you not recognise that the Mary Rose thing was really rather silly though? I am not obsessed by so-called wokeness, but I found it was so absurd that it seemed like a parody or even an April Fools, even though it seems it is neither.
Yes, I did think it was silly. Which was why I said: "The thing is, I find that link *funny*"
I get that, but is it harmless? As with so many things commentary on the extreme devalues debate. That said though, do you not think concocting a load of old tosh with no basis in historical fact debases understanding? It would not be impossible for someone reading that nonsense to assume that same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose and had been historically proven? If it was like a floating gay sauna, then good on them, I hope they had fun before it sank, but there really is no evidence. It is misleading twaddle (that is also a patronising insult to gay people) and should be called out as such.
Yes, it is harmless.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
So, what, Philip Hensher is getting worked up about nothing? Because he is just a highly intelligent gay historian, and you are, what, whatever you are.
You plainly think something can be both "a patronising insult to gay people" and "harmless" all at once.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
For all those of you who are accidentally posting drafts of previous replies with your replies, you can delete a draft by going to https://vf.politicalbetting.com/ , go to the top-left-hand corner, click on "My Drafts", hover over your draft and (without clicking on your draft) hover over the top-right-hand corner of your draft. The word "delete" will appear. Click on that and it'll go away.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Oh come on Nick, sometimes it can be entertaining. Watching CR and JJ battle it out is far more entertaining than my occasional spats with Malcolm where Malcolm just launces into a tirade of largely inarticulate abuse. At least they are debating.
What subject of great import to your fellow man would you like to engage occasional visitors such as myself pray?
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I love Camden, I love London, I have dozens of friends here (very important), I also have friends that come thrugh London, and I adore the general buzz: always have, since I moved here four decades ago as a student. I'll probably snuff it here
TBH, however, my love for the place IS assisted by
1. Being affluent 2. Not having to commute to any job, ever 3. Being regularly able to escape the place, often for free, for 6 months of the year, especially during winter, all around the world
I confess my view of London might be a little more jaundiced if those things were not true. But isn't that the case anywhere?
eg Life on a tropical island sounds fun, but not if you have very little money, very few friends, and a job cleaning 500 toilets in a crap hotel. Ditto around the world
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up. It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran an event 3 weeks ago - local paper, and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends. He used to live in London/Brighton and generates nothing but eye rolls here.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
So clear and yet you can't actually define it.
I've defined it multiple times, dipstick.
Go through my comment history. Read, re-read and read again until you get it through your puny brain.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Yes, several have contacted me to say they've withdrawn from the site due to the tedium but also, at times, some bullying behaviour from some more unpleasant and obnoxious posters.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Conversation expands to fill the time available. Silly season, no cricket, GE 15 months away. But not so many sleeps till 1/15/2024 and the Iowa caucuses
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up. It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran an event 3 weeks ago - local paper, and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends. He used to live in London/Brighton and generates nothing but eye rolls here.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
So clear and yet you can't actually define it.
I've defined it multiple times, dipstick.
Go through my comment history. Read, re-read and read again until you get it through your puny brain.
You seem to have repeated an old post.
It's a bookshop that sells some books you don't like - so what.
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I love Camden, I love London, I have dozens of friends here (very important), I also have friends that come thrugh London, and I adore the general buzz: always have, since I moved here four decades ago as a student. I'll probably snuff it here
TBH, however, my love for the place IS assisted by
1. Being affluent 2. Not having to commute to any job, ever 3. Being regularly able to escape the place, often for free, for 6 months of the year, especially during winter, all around the world
I confess my view of London might be a little more jaundiced if those things were not true. But isn't that the case anywhere?
eg Life on a tropical island sounds fun, but not if you have very little money, very few friends, and a job cleaning 500 toilets in a crap hotel. Ditto around the world
A very measured response old chap, that makes a lot of sense.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Oh come on Nick, sometimes it can be entertaining. Watching CR and JJ battle it out is far more entertaining than my occasional spats with Malcolm where Malcolm just launces into a tirade of largely inarticulate abuse. At least they are debating.
What subject of great import to your fellow man would you like to engage occasional visitors such as myself pray?
The obvious one is "how does the next government start clearing all of this and can they do it an a way that gives them a chance of re-election?"
Two problems with that are a) it feels a bit presumptious, despite a twenty point polling gap with less than twenty months to go and b) the answers are probably too depressing to contemplate.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
The political scene in the UK is rather dull at the moment, Nick. Nothing much is happening and there is a strong consensus as to what will happen next, but it will be a while before it happens. We are becalmed for the moment.
It will change, and life, gaiety, and the occasional fist-fight will return to the threads in due course.
Meanwhile I quite enjoy the off-thread arguments, even if I'm disinclined to engage myself. It is all part of PB's rich tapestry.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
The political scene in the UK is rather dull at the moment, Nick. Nothing much is happening and there is a strong consensus as to what will happen next, but it will be a while before it happens. We are becalmed for the moment.
It will change, and life, gaiety, and the occasional fist-fight will return to the threads in due course.
Meanwhile I quite enjoy the off-thread arguments, even if I'm disinclined to engage myself. It is all part of PB's rich tapestry.
And we can't argue about really important subjects, like cricket, because we all agree that the Aussies are cheats and the Hundred's a joke, except for those people who hate cricket (some of whom dislike it to the extent of following the Hundred, God help them).
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
There is an overarching reason: a dearth of elections. PB is keenly interested in British politics, implausibly interested in American politics, and reasonably interested in French, German, Irish, Canadian and ANZAC politics. Anything else is not concentrated on. This made me a bit sad, as we had the Spanish, Turkish and two Greek elections in 2023, and I think a Dutch one as well, and despite the best efforts of @stodge, @quincel, @Peter_the_Punter and @double_carpet, nobody was really interested. We've got a Polish election coming up and a couple of Governor (I really can't use the word "gubernatorial") and state elections coming up in the states, which may rouse people out of their torpor. I'd help, but RSS2023 is coming up and am busy.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
I love sports cars, not SUVs, but you sort of get funneled into the pragmatics of them when you have 2 or 3 kids and live outside London.
Yes, shock horror, some people do live outside London.
They exist outside London. I'm not sure you could call it "living"
You reside in Camden in a one bed flat don't you? I don't mean to be unkind, but I would call that "existing". People who live in London desperately want us to believe it is wonderful, and for those that live in a £5M property in South Ken it perhaps is, but even then you are still surrounded by a bustling mass of humanity all trying to climb over one another like so many termites.
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
I've only ever heard Scottish people talk like that. Most people who live in London don't think London is either total shite or amazing. They don't think in stereotypes about themselves. They've got more intelligence than that.
I am not sure whether you left you sense of analysis or irony at the door, but you will note that it was a response to my dear friend @Leon who said that those outside London were "existing" not "living". As he is a converted and convinced towny and I am a country bumpkin it was a form of banter. Sigh! At least @Sunil_Prasannan in Zone 4 understood!
There's a surprising number of Grade II Listed stuff in Ilford, in addition to Newbury Park tube.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Oh come on Nick, sometimes it can be entertaining. Watching CR and JJ battle it out is far more entertaining than my occasional spats with Malcolm where Malcolm just launces into a tirade of largely inarticulate abuse. At least they are debating.
What subject of great import to your fellow man would you like to engage occasional visitors such as myself pray?
The obvious one is "how does the next government start clearing all of this and can they do it an a way that gives them a chance of re-election?"
Two problems with that are a) it feels a bit presumptious, despite a twenty point polling gap with less than twenty months to go and b) the answers are probably too depressing to contemplate.
I always like to be an optimist, but I think anyone who thinks that the current lightweights and lower-middle manager types that make up the current front bench of the Labour Party stand any chance of clearing up something that might be easily cleared up (can't think of appropriate metaphor) are going to be sorely disappointed.
I can rarely think of a time in my late middle age lifetime when there has been such an obvious paucity of talent on both frontbenches.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
Careful - you’ll have the R101 revisionists jumping on you.
R101 was a bad design. Actually manufactured with some considerable skill. But a fundamentally bad design.
Ah, a narrative hook! Do tell.
Well we start with Slide Rule. But then the revisionists tell you that Shute was prejudiced and a poor designer. See Peter Masefield.
The problem is that the revisionists don't answer the actually questions about the design. The gasbag design failed. The rectification to that caused massive leaks (because of design details in the framework) and so on.
The net result was a that an experimental aircraft, without a proper airworthiness certificate, set out on a trip round half the world. After having been chopped and stretched like a cheap limo. Overloaded. With a known problem of losing half a ton of lift - per hour. With an outer cover that was falling apart.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
I think you have misunderstood the link, which is to a gay man whose views on "woke" align very closely with Casino's.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
You are hyper-emotional and hysterical when this subject comes up, as you invasively sweat out what you think is your identity of being a decent human being.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
Casino, I value your perspective. There's a line where niceness turns into bad woke, and that line does get crossed. But I believe I remember you getting very emotional about the wrongness of the stock choices in a new bookshop. Apologies if I've got that wrong.
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
Yes, that wound me up. It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran an event 3 weeks ago - local paper, and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends. He used to live in London/Brighton and generates nothing but eye rolls here.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
So clear and yet you can't actually define it.
I've defined it multiple times, dipstick.
Go through my comment history. Read, re-read and read again until you get it through your puny brain.
I’ve seen you try and define it on multiple occasions. But it remains the case that only you on this board appear to understand your definition. You clearly operate on an elevated intellectual plane to the rest of us.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I too have noticed a dwindling in the variety of subjects - and also the diversity of commenters
I have a fear that PB is simply getting a little old. Literally and metaphorically
However I am not sure there is much to be done about it. How do you "recruit" new people to a forum?
I also think we have been through an exceptionally busy period in politics, geopolitics and world events - for almost ten years now - and there is a weariness in everyone, when it comes to news. We have had a surfeit of news. People don't want to talk about the news. It is all depressing, or too much. So a site like PB suffers
And finally it doesn't help that Birtish politics, our speciality, is finally in a particularly dull patch (after a lot of kerfuffle) where a knackered old Tory party is obviously going to lose to a massively boring Labour party which is bereft of ideas. Even the Scot Nats have retreated, as an interesting threat. That state of affairs doesn't make for exciting threads. There is only so much chat you can conjure from the fate of Nadine Dorries, MP
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
Well I will agree with you (and @Gardenwalker) that it is utterly bonkers, but I don't understand why you think this isn't a modern form of political correctness. It is the same sort of stuff that has always happened in different form or another. I also agree with you that those who do it are probably obsessed about making all sorts of stuff about identity politics and if I got into a discussion with them on it I would probably blow my top, but generally I find it humorous and I don't get angry about it, although I would if it directly impacted me, which may happen, but hasn't yet.
More to the point, the page is virtually content free and utterly uninteresting. Why anyone has spent time worrying about it, let alone posting about it here, is beyond me. Five minutes of my time wasted.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
You just can't accept you're infected by it.
That's how bad it is.
You're the idiot, not me.
You’ve just lost your shit over a blog post. Take a look in the mirror.
The only person who needs to look in the mirror is you.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
So, what would your ideal system of government look like?
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Get back into Parliament and put forward a bill banning all pizza toppings apart from pineapple.
That'll get this place going again.
That and a bill to provide large number of Trans Gay Woke Mobile Homes, in the Georgian Bath vernacular, to trundle round the streets, forever, at 20mph.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
It is failing, but where I disagree is that I think wholesale constitutional reform is needed to regain people's trust, plus work done on how we can re-introduce people of quality into the HoCs in both parties.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
So, what would your ideal system of government look like?
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Oh come on Nick, sometimes it can be entertaining. Watching CR and JJ battle it out is far more entertaining than my occasional spats with Malcolm where Malcolm just launces into a tirade of largely inarticulate abuse. At least they are debating.
What subject of great import to your fellow man would you like to engage occasional visitors such as myself pray?
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
The political scene in the UK is rather dull at the moment, Nick. Nothing much is happening and there is a strong consensus as to what will happen next, but it will be a while before it happens. We are becalmed for the moment.
It will change, and life, gaiety, and the occasional fist-fight will return to the threads in due course.
Meanwhile I quite enjoy the off-thread arguments, even if I'm disinclined to engage myself. It is all part of PB's rich tapestry.
Waiting for the inevitable second coming of Truss is indeed a bit tedious.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
Careful - you’ll have the R101 revisionists jumping on you.
R101 was a bad design. Actually manufactured with some considerable skill. But a fundamentally bad design.
Ah, a narrative hook! Do tell.
Well we start with Slide Rule. But then the revisionists tell you that Shute was prejudiced and a poor designer. See Peter Masefield.
The problem is that the revisionists don't answer the actually questions about the design. The gasbag design failed. The rectification to that caused massive leaks (because of design details in the framework) and so on.
The net result was a that an experimental aircraft, without a proper airworthiness certificate, set out on a trip round half the world. After having been chopped and stretched like a cheap limo. Overloaded. With a known problem of losing half a ton of lift - per hour. With an outer cover that was falling apart.
Difficult for anyone to argue with Shute's comment on the airworthiness certificate, whatever one thinks of the rest of his account:
'After all other safety procedures had been abandoned, a piece of paper could not prevent R101 from taking off. So a certificate of airworthiness was written out at the Air Ministry and handed to the captain just prior to departure. It stands to the great credit of the French government that after this disaster on French they did not make an issue of this: between friends, some things are better forgotten.'
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I think you are right in general but is it not the result of the electoral polling implosion. The vast unchanging leads means there is little to say wrt politics so a whole load of boring idiot topics take over.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
Yes, several have contacted me to say they've withdrawn from the site due to the tedium but also, at times, some bullying behaviour from some more unpleasant and obnoxious posters.
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
I love the hangers at Cardington. They're brilliant, their bulk and sheer mass imposing themselves onto the local flattish landscape. But they're also ugly, in a way. Purely functional and utilitarian.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
Used to love seeing them in the days when I had a friend near there and we went to Old Warden once a year.
the R101 isn't as remembered as much as it should be. The crash was almost slow motion (~2mph) and if it wasn't for the hydrogen they would have walked away.
Careful - you’ll have the R101 revisionists jumping on you.
R101 was a bad design. Actually manufactured with some considerable skill. But a fundamentally bad design.
Ah, a narrative hook! Do tell.
Well we start with Slide Rule. But then the revisionists tell you that Shute was prejudiced and a poor designer. See Peter Masefield.
The problem is that the revisionists don't answer the actually questions about the design. The gasbag design failed. The rectification to that caused massive leaks (because of design details in the framework) and so on.
The net result was a that an experimental aircraft, without a proper airworthiness certificate, set out on a trip round half the world. After having been chopped and stretched like a cheap limo. Overloaded. With a known problem of losing half a ton of lift - per hour. With an outer cover that was falling apart.
I did not know that: thank you. And I do know who Nevil Shute was. I should know more than I do.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
The problem with woke is the underlying mentality that drives it.
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
Hmmm. I'd argue that the 'anti-woke' are currently the ones nearest fascism and concentration camps.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Which is, methinks, why right-wingers around the globe are so enamored with anti-Wokeism.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
It is very very clear what it means.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
woke definition - first result on Google "alert to injustice and discrimination in society, especially racism"
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
So, what would your ideal system of government look like?
One man, one vote is my plan. Plus, it will incorporate every single system of proportional representation *and* FPTP.
This farcical update from the Mary Rose museum which uses various objects in its collection to bang on, utterly tangentially, about queer identity and being non-binary.
I keep highlighting the insanity of the Woke mind virus, and being told it's a modern form of political correctness.
It's not. It's a total obsession with making absolutely everything about identity politics, coupled with moral lectures to be imbibed on top, that are deeply contentious and divisive.
The thing is, I find that link *funny*, as I believe it was meant to be. You find it 'woke'.
I laugh at (and with) them. You get angry.
No, that's all in your head. I just vociferously oppose it.
You get far more angry when this subject comes up than I do.
"You get far more angry when this subject"
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
I've been posting less on PB lately, partly because of other interests but also because recently it's been dominated by the same 10 or so people arguing a subject to death, each putting their view (fine) and then putting it again, and again, with minor variations. Wokeness, 20 mph zones, house design, each has occuped 1-2 days of repetitive posting.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
I get bored with the spats about things that dont matter I admit and refresh and comment less
Most things on here that are argued don't matter
Discuss.
sorry but its true, our democratic system has failed. It is not delivering for most people in this country. That is what we should be discussing not tinkering with things a little like introducing pr or an elected house of lords
So, what would your ideal system of government look like?
One man, one vote is my plan. Plus, it will incorporate every single system of proportional representation *and* FPTP.
Why do I hear the word "Patrician" speeding towards me?...
Comments
London is pleasant for a visit, particularly if you are a member of a club, or going to the theatre when staying at the Savoy, or even perhaps if one is visiting friends who are confined there. But living there permanently? This requires a constant delusional pretence that it is amazing, when in reality it is totally shite for 99% of its residents.
???
No. I just laugh at idiots who use terms like "Woke mind virus". Because they cannot accept people can have other views.
I *think* I am a decent human being. I try to be a decent human being. To what am I 'lost' ?
https://arquiscopio.com/archivo/2013/02/02/hangares-para-dirigibles-de-orly/?lang=en
But I also wondered about this - U-boat bunkers.
http://www.u-boote.fr/dom.htm
THough structurally I think the airship jangars are the more likely model. So they win.
(Greetings from Zone 4, BTW!)
Woke often gets labelled as 'Puritan', the implication being that those who are woke are miserable, do-gooders who preach to everyone else.
But what gets missed in that conversation is Puritanism wasn't a religion in itself, it was the English derivation of Calvinism.
Calvinism's central doctrine was that it had already been predetermined whether you were saved or not. Your actions counted for nothing (the opposite of the Catholic view). While theoretically you did not know whether you had been chosen, it was taken as granted that you had been if you were a Calvinist / Puritan.
That had two effects. One was the self-righteous bit. That is the part that everyone associates with woke. But there is a second, far nastier part that is you can do pretty much what you want because you have already been saved and so, whatever you do - however reprehensible in 'normal' terms - is by itself a 'good' act and justified. That was the thinking that underpinned, for example, the South African Dutch Reformed Church's support of Apartheid and racial discrimination for centuries up until the 1980s.
It is also a line of thinking that has much in common with the ideas of Communism and Nazism, i.e. that it is fine to commit what may seem to many people 'evil' in the cause of the greater good.
I'm not saying the wokesters (yet) will have their concentration camps out but, given their comments and general attitudes, you can see there the direction of travel.
That is the main problem with woke.
This is the great thing about architecture - I love them, but I shouldn't. And yes, their history plays into that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardington_Airfield#/media/File:RAF-Cardington01-full.jpg
(You don't get the scale on that photo until you see the car in the foreground.)
That's how bad it is.
You're the idiot, not me.
But yes, both sides go too far, especially in wanting there to be only one view. But the screeches of 'anti-woke' seem to be against *anything* that might mean change, or change from the 1950s. Which is why the screechers are so unable to actually define 'woke'. They're shaking their fists at any views they do not like.
Unreflective people think Woke is coterminous with being a nice person, and therefore respond to any criticism of it in a shrill and uncontrolled manner in the belief the person making must be a nasty person.
That's you. You lack the circumspection or self-control to be able to engage with it in any other way, and that's why you're a lost cause.
As for being an idiot: yes, I am. Sometimes. Not all of the time, or I hope, much of the time. And I try to learn.
But I am not an idiot in a core belief I fear you do not share: let people be who they want to be, as long as they do not hurt other people (and hurt feelings is not hurt).
That's how bad it i Yes, we have lost organised religion but a lot of modern Woke has its roots in more puritan aspects of our religious heritage and we see that playing out today.
LOL. I'm laughing. At you.
Read your own posts if you want to see hysteria and small-mindedness.
That's how bad it i Like I said. A lost cause.
That's the stupidest premise for an "analysis" that I've read for quite some time.
Let me guess...Ben Walker thought Theresa May was going to wallop Labour in the 2017 election?
How defeatist the Tories must be feeling, what with immigration being an issue that belongs to Labour and is driven by Labour and on which it is so hard for the Tories to get their point of view across, what with the gutter press being so pro-Labour, and what with there being a rich vein of pro-immigrant feeling in the country that's so easy for Labour to tap into.
Even if the stupid premise had any sense in it, why does he think political parties put their guys into government ministries? If the Tory leadership thought it was a foregone conclusion that they'd lose the election, they'd call the election at the last possible moment. Government is about contracts. Filling pockets.
(Side note: have any specific contracts been mentioned in the ongoing Electoral Commission story, or is it just a "La Patrie En Danger" drill?)
Even if your diagnosis of woke is right, you're really not in a position to criticise others for shrill, uncontrolled responses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxlV_GGU5YQ
It's a Wokeshop not a bookshop. The guy even ran a week-long event 3 weeks ago - article in the local paper and everything - where he said he was on a "mission" against misogyny and would spend a whole week promoting this new book (which I don't care to remember or want to promote) and encourage any customer that came through the door to buy one and offer half price to give to their friends.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The shameless self-promotion, the narcissism, the obsession with identity politics books (as if no other lessons can be learned from any other books) and the way he patronises his customers rather than tries to welcome them and service their need. He used to live in London/Brighton and moved here last year. He seems to generate nothing but eye rolls.
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to.
I'd also argue that it highlights other interesting issues: objects can have different uses; people can perceive the usefulness of objects differently, and historians and archaeologists can get things very wrong.
"...same sex sexual activity was rife on the Mary Rose"
What makes you think that homosexuality is a modern thing?
R101 was a bad design. Actually manufactured with some considerable skill. But a fundamentally bad design.
(PS if you are sheltered enough to be not sure what one is I suggest you might not wish to google it)
There are a fair few 'Christian' bookshops around. They don't sell a full range of books. Neither did the railway-bookshop-slash-barbers I used to go to in Derby. It is still a bookshop. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. Getting angry about it is rather silly. I don't get wound up by Christian bookshops.
Precisely because "Woke" can mean ANYTHING that one wants to think it means.
Hence perfect for wack-job hack politicos and their hench-people here & across the web.
'You're not guacamole you're just a BLOODY PEA!'
Peas and avocado smashed with garlic and lime is very nice actually.
I'm a Londoner who unfortunately doesn't live there any more. When I did live there, I felt if anything sorry for those among the non-Londoners who came to live there who kept going on about how great a city it was and suggesting they were so cool to live in it. People who are actually from London rarely do that.
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to. Such bookshops label themselves as such. This guy is purporting to be neutral and offering a community service.
If he labelled his shop a 'Wokeshop' or, more realistically, a 'Diversity' bookshop then that would be more honest.
I try to get the waiter's attention by blinking in morse code
Why are you blinking so much?
I've got something in my eye
Here, let me get it out
No, thank you, I don't wanna die
Don't google it. Don't. Just, don't.
You plainly think something can be both "a patronising insult to gay people" and "harmless" all at once.
Those who keep asking what it means are being entirely disingenuous and engaging in distraction tactics.
It's like all those people who continually post "Who funds you?" under full-time campaigning types they don't like on Twitter, no matter how many times they answer it; it's an effort to undermine the conversation they want to have and discredit the messenger.
I'm no particular loss, but I notice that there aren't as many contributions from less frequent posters either. I wonder if they're being put off? This isn't to say that anyone shouldn't say what they think on anything. But maybe consider moving on after a few posts on a particular subject?
"Aylesbury bus station: Is it really 'one of the most depressing places on earth'?"
https://www.buckinghamshirelive.com/news/buckinghamshire-news/gallery/aylesbury-bus-station-really-one-6058829
What subject of great import to your fellow man would you like to engage occasional visitors such as myself pray?
TBH, however, my love for the place IS assisted by
1. Being affluent
2. Not having to commute to any job, ever
3. Being regularly able to escape the place, often for free, for 6 months of the year, especially during winter, all around the world
I confess my view of London might be a little more jaundiced if those things were not true. But isn't that the case anywhere?
eg Life on a tropical island sounds fun, but not if you have very little money, very few friends, and a job cleaning 500 toilets in a crap hotel. Ditto around the world
There's so much about it that bothers me. The self-prom
I have never set foot in his bookshop and never intend to. I've defined it multiple times, dipstick.
Go through my comment history. Read, re-read and read again until you get it through your puny brain.
Discuss.
It's a bookshop that sells some books you don't like - so what.
You don't need to shop there...
Two problems with that are a) it feels a bit presumptious, despite a twenty point polling gap with less than twenty months to go and b) the answers are probably too depressing to contemplate.
It will change, and life, gaiety, and the occasional fist-fight will return to the threads in due course.
Meanwhile I quite enjoy the off-thread arguments, even if I'm disinclined to engage myself. It is all part of PB's rich tapestry.
Just a few examples:
Ilford Town Hall
Barkingside Library
Barkingside tube station
I can rarely think of a time in my late middle age lifetime when there has been such an obvious paucity of talent on both frontbenches.
The problem is that the revisionists don't answer the actually questions about the design. The gasbag design failed. The rectification to that caused massive leaks (because of design details in the framework) and so on.
The net result was a that an experimental aircraft, without a proper airworthiness certificate, set out on a trip round half the world. After having been chopped and stretched like a cheap limo. Overloaded. With a known problem of losing half a ton of lift - per hour. With an outer cover that was falling apart.
I have a fear that PB is simply getting a little old. Literally and metaphorically
However I am not sure there is much to be done about it. How do you "recruit" new people to a forum?
I also think we have been through an exceptionally busy period in politics, geopolitics and world events - for almost ten years now - and there is a weariness in everyone, when it comes to news. We have had a surfeit of news. People don't want to talk about the news. It is all depressing, or too much. So a site like PB suffers
And finally it doesn't help that Birtish politics, our speciality, is finally in a particularly dull patch (after a lot of kerfuffle) where a knackered old Tory party is obviously going to lose to a massively boring Labour party which is bereft of ideas. Even the Scot Nats have retreated, as an interesting threat. That state of affairs doesn't make for exciting threads. There is only so much chat you can conjure from the fate of Nadine Dorries, MP
Why anyone has spent time worrying about it, let alone posting about it here, is beyond me.
Five minutes of my time wasted.
That'll get this place going again.
That and a bill to provide large number of Trans Gay Woke Mobile Homes, in the Georgian Bath vernacular, to trundle round the streets, forever, at 20mph.
except I cant
Get some help.
'After all other safety procedures had been abandoned, a piece of paper could not prevent R101 from taking off. So a certificate of airworthiness was written out at the Air Ministry and handed to the captain just prior to departure. It stands to the great credit of the French government that after this disaster on French they did not make an issue of this: between friends, some things are better forgotten.'
"alert to injustice and discrimination in society, especially racism"
That would spark things up
It would be terrible for the world, probably, but fun for us
[edit: and "Franchise"]