I woke up feeling refreshed at 10am (dry day before). Did four hours solid work. Picked up Laundry and had a delicious Chinese dumpling lunch (+2 beers)
Came back and was gonna sun bathe but then fell asleep instead for half an hour (not unknown - I like a nap). So I got up refreshed but then almost immediately went back to sleep again and had a dream where my ex girlfriend Sarah xxxx (now an esteemed civil engineer) was now complexly employed by some Indian steel magnate and returned to the age of 19 and she was charging £20 to look up her skirt on the promise she wasn’t wearing any underwear and I agreed the price as it seemed fair and then I woke up
What’s that about?
Face facts, you’re an old git now, the only young girls visiting your bedroom will be the ones delivering your meals on wheels.
Best start looking now for a comfortable sweaters and slippers.
This interpretation did occur to me, but I rejected it on the grounds I dislike slippers
These might work in an Uncle Monty kinda way?
I have reached the age where the "slip on shoe" has an added appeal, I confess
But I am determined to resist
You start with a Chelsea Boot and it goes downhill from there.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
I woke up feeling refreshed at 10am (dry day before). Did four hours solid work. Picked up Laundry and had a delicious Chinese dumpling lunch (+2 beers)
Came back and was gonna sun bathe but then fell asleep instead for half an hour (not unknown - I like a nap). So I got up refreshed but then almost immediately went back to sleep again and had a dream where my ex girlfriend Sarah xxxx (now an esteemed civil engineer) was now complexly employed by some Indian steel magnate and returned to the age of 19 and she was charging £20 to look up her skirt on the promise she wasn’t wearing any underwear and I agreed the price as it seemed fair and then I woke up
What’s that about?
Sounds like you woke up too soon.
You’ll be pleased to know that pb got a glancing reference in the dream
While all the weird skirt shenanigans were going on I had to keep replying to some special group call and response chant someone had devised for everyobe staying in the hotel (it was a dream, bear with me) and lots of the responders were - I sensed, pb-ers
I wonder if the message of this dream is ITS TIME TO GO HOME YOU ARE NOW GOING MAD
The first rule of all social interactions is nobody wants to hear about your dreams.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
Perhaps they should be allowed to march round in circles, like your argument ?
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
How about laying siege to Jacob Rees-Mogg's children. All good?
Being a politician is a choice. Outside of one vote every 4-5 years, your representative has no recourse to you as a voter (barring a recall petition). I think, if you want a liberal democracy, protesting your elected officials should be the norm. We can argue about how far away (I'd be happy with, say, the other side of the road rather than outside the front door, for example) or what kinds of protest and when - but in general turning up with a few placards or banners, or even shouting slogans, is not the end of the world when you have the power to vote on things that are literally life and death for people.
But then I'm not a particular fan of representative democracy. I can't remember who said it (maybe Chomsky, maybe Varoufakis), but liberal representative democracy is a smoke and mirrors show to give the appearance of representation of the people. It's a steam valve that is allowed to open up every 4-5 years to release the pressure caused by material political conditions, but the system basically demands that you only release that pressure at times when they say it is okay. This is the gloved iron fist - a pretence at democracy that comes down hard if you dare try to do democracy outside its remit via protest or mass movement and organising.
Surpassing disingenuousness. Of the hundreds of issues this raises, here is just one question. Planet earth is a long and large laboratory of political theory and practice. Which is the nation state of any substantial size (say over 2 million population) that best, even if imperfectly, exemplifies your version of non representative democracy?
Yeah I mean I was going to go back to him on this point. It's Winston Churchill all over again. What other system provides the rights that ours does.
@148grss makes the classic mistake of thinking that "the other side" isn't as hell bent on imposing their system on him as he is on imposing his system on them.
Democracy is the compromise whereby everyone agrees to go with a common system.
Edit: I mean that this needs saying on a politically-inclined website is quite disappointing.
But there are other forms of democracy that is not about individuals forgoing their stake in society to a representative, who forgoes their individual morality to a party, who tend to give up their principles to organised capital (at least in our system).
As I have said before - direct democracy would be great, no problem with that. Even if we couldn't go over night into a direct democracy from what we currently have - we could make steps towards it - workers involved in democracy at work, tenants unions being more common, changing lower levels of government from representative systems to fully communally engaged systems. It would take effort, sure; but I think some things are worth it. And if you don't think that and you want a representative democracy, then at least allowing people to protest their representatives should be fair game?
But you reject the idea of direct democracy to decide immigration policy?
We've had this conversation before. 1) I still think in direct democracy my policy position would prove to be the popular one. 2) A referendum, written before hand by political representatives with state power behind it, alongside a privately owned media apparatus that would feed into it is no my idea of direct democracy - especially when the outcome of such a referendum would still have to be enacted by representatives (in our system).
If we had, for example, community assemblies where everyone spent a lot of time discussing the issue together and came to a consensus - sure. But that isn't a possible reality at the moment.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm an optimist and a utopian and believe (incorrectly) in a general decency that all humans share because, typically, most people just want to get along, see their family and friends and have their material needs met.
How can *everyone* take part in an assembly? Are you not just reinventing representative democracy?
No - everyone means everyone. Again, I'd point to Rojava where they literally knocked on peoples' doors and said their is an assembly, come along - yes that means your wife too, she is a person as well - etc etc. I understand these things are difficult to imagine with the confines of the system we live in that alienates us from our neighbours and our communities, where neighbours are strangers and the people you work with are dispersed across miles and miles because everyone can commute and therefore your work links are not your social links and so on. But it can happen.
The system where I can elect someone who is broadly aligned aligned with my views to a properly constituted assembly to deliberate and make decisions while I'm at the pub isn't a bad one.
Your alternative sounds like forcing reasonably sensible, often busy people to spend hour after hour listening to genuinely dull but committed extremists, just in order to stop them doing something utterly stupid. It would exclude those with families, or busy jobs, those who can't make it due to age and infirmity etc.
I agree "it can happen". I just don't want it to as it sounds horrific.
The requirement for people to be personally present has been used since ancient times to… filter… who gets power.
The requirement that you have lots of free time to rock up at the market place and vote is, of course, great for the rich. Not so great for the chap who doesn’t own a horse and lives 150 miles from Rome.
More recently, groups of retired councillors have deliberately forced out younger people by holding all the council meetings in working hours.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
Like you, I'm a huge fan of the right to peaceful protest. However, I fundamentally disagree with your view that it's okay to protest outside people's private residences. Corbyn had to endure this frequently, and it was an unacceptable intrusion into his private life. There's a whole host of fairly obvious reasons that this should be out of bounds. If I were considering standing for public office, the fear that I may be subject to protests outside my family house would be something of a deterrent.
When I annoyed the Mail on Sunday about something they waylaid my wife outside her house and asked her questions obviously designed to provoke something quotable - "This is a small house, I bet you've got a nice villa tucked away somewhere?" and that sort of thing. She had no idea what the issue was about (I'd confirmed that a Tory MP had told a racist joke, and was criticised for disclosing something from a private dinner by a Danish company), so was furious not just with them but with me for exposing her to the ambush. That sort of thing definitely does put people off from any public role.
If you want to protest what someone does in their work, then protest outside their work. In the case of an MP, there’s a blooming big square right outside where they all work.
It should be seen as totally unacceptable to turn up at someone’s house without permission, whether you’re a protestor or a tabloid hack. Politicians are human first and foremost, and having one’s family subject to harassment isn’t what they are signing up to do.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
You sound sensible to me. I’m notorious, though, for odd-ball opinions!
My summary: This is all pretty new, but you give the right hormones, then someone born with a male body can express milk. The milk is pretty much identical to any other breast milk. The challenge is getting enough volume of milk.
"To our knowledge, this is only the second case in the literature to report on the macronutrients of induced milk9 and the first to present data on the HMO [human milk oligosaccharides] and hormone content from a nongestational parent also on gender affirming hormone treatment. As reported, the induced milk was as robust in protein, calories, fat, lactose, and HMOs as term milk from a gestational parent. The prior report also documented comparable levels of macronutrients in the induced milk of a transgender woman compared with those in standard term milk.9,14
"Although HMO profile varies from person to person, the overall HMO content of this induced milk is comparable with standard term human milk. These results show that induced milk from a TGD nongestational parent also produces adequate nutrients for a growing infant. LH and FSH levels were below detection range, suggesting very low, if any, levels of these hormones. This may be due to the hormone therapy suppressing LH and FSH production in transgender women.19"
[...]
"The amount of milk production by the patient in this report would not be enough to solely sustain an infant's nutritional needs. However, since the patient was cofeeding with the gestational parent, this amount aligned with her breastfeeding goals. For this patient, considerations may include reduced pumping sessions around delivery while in the hospital and time constraints with newborn's needs. The prior three published case reports discuss similar findings.7,9,10 Additional research is needed to highlight potential limitations specific to this population."
I assume that the "right hormones" just means progesterone. Trans women usually get given estradiol (oestrogen) only, so will require progesterone too in order produce a reasonable volume of milk. Plenty of cis women take progesterone (the pill!) whilst breastfeeding without ill effects, so I'm not sure why the Telegraph find this surprising...
(Cis men and progesterone-deficient women can often induce lactaction without progesterone supplementation but the volumes produced are very low)
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
How about laying siege to Jacob Rees-Mogg's children. All good?
Being a politician is a choice. Outside of one vote every 4-5 years, your representative has no recourse to you as a voter (barring a recall petition). I think, if you want a liberal democracy, protesting your elected officials should be the norm. We can argue about how far away (I'd be happy with, say, the other side of the road rather than outside the front door, for example) or what kinds of protest and when - but in general turning up with a few placards or banners, or even shouting slogans, is not the end of the world when you have the power to vote on things that are literally life and death for people.
But then I'm not a particular fan of representative democracy. I can't remember who said it (maybe Chomsky, maybe Varoufakis), but liberal representative democracy is a smoke and mirrors show to give the appearance of representation of the people. It's a steam valve that is allowed to open up every 4-5 years to release the pressure caused by material political conditions, but the system basically demands that you only release that pressure at times when they say it is okay. This is the gloved iron fist - a pretence at democracy that comes down hard if you dare try to do democracy outside its remit via protest or mass movement and organising.
Surpassing disingenuousness. Of the hundreds of issues this raises, here is just one question. Planet earth is a long and large laboratory of political theory and practice. Which is the nation state of any substantial size (say over 2 million population) that best, even if imperfectly, exemplifies your version of non representative democracy?
Yeah I mean I was going to go back to him on this point. It's Winston Churchill all over again. What other system provides the rights that ours does.
@148grss makes the classic mistake of thinking that "the other side" isn't as hell bent on imposing their system on him as he is on imposing his system on them.
Democracy is the compromise whereby everyone agrees to go with a common system.
Edit: I mean that this needs saying on a politically-inclined website is quite disappointing.
But there are other forms of democracy that is not about individuals forgoing their stake in society to a representative, who forgoes their individual morality to a party, who tend to give up their principles to organised capital (at least in our system).
As I have said before - direct democracy would be great, no problem with that. Even if we couldn't go over night into a direct democracy from what we currently have - we could make steps towards it - workers involved in democracy at work, tenants unions being more common, changing lower levels of government from representative systems to fully communally engaged systems. It would take effort, sure; but I think some things are worth it. And if you don't think that and you want a representative democracy, then at least allowing people to protest their representatives should be fair game?
But you reject the idea of direct democracy to decide immigration policy?
We've had this conversation before. 1) I still think in direct democracy my policy position would prove to be the popular one. 2) A referendum, written before hand by political representatives with state power behind it, alongside a privately owned media apparatus that would feed into it is no my idea of direct democracy - especially when the outcome of such a referendum would still have to be enacted by representatives (in our system).
If we had, for example, community assemblies where everyone spent a lot of time discussing the issue together and came to a consensus - sure. But that isn't a possible reality at the moment.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm an optimist and a utopian and believe (incorrectly) in a general decency that all humans share because, typically, most people just want to get along, see their family and friends and have their material needs met.
How can *everyone* take part in an assembly? Are you not just reinventing representative democracy?
No - everyone means everyone. Again, I'd point to Rojava where they literally knocked on peoples' doors and said their is an assembly, come along - yes that means your wife too, she is a person as well - etc etc. I understand these things are difficult to imagine with the confines of the system we live in that alienates us from our neighbours and our communities, where neighbours are strangers and the people you work with are dispersed across miles and miles because everyone can commute and therefore your work links are not your social links and so on. But it can happen.
There's a lot of Rojava hagiography. It's not quite the utopia you present.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
I think those last two posts are a pretty decent summary of the position (there is no fascism without violence, there is often violence associated with a transition to anarchism).
Of course, with any overthrow of an entire system (rather than a change of regime within a system), old (usually) men tend to channel the aggression of young (usually) men to do it. The political philosophy isn't really as important as the sanction to smash some things.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
I’m trying to remember which anarchist wrote a letter to a newspaper, demanding they stop portraying anarchists as violent. Otherwise the staff of the newspaper would be attacked.
My summary: This is all pretty new, but you give the right hormones, then someone born with a male body can express milk. The milk is pretty much identical to any other breast milk. The challenge is getting enough volume of milk.
"To our knowledge, this is only the second case in the literature to report on the macronutrients of induced milk9 and the first to present data on the HMO [human milk oligosaccharides] and hormone content from a nongestational parent also on gender affirming hormone treatment. As reported, the induced milk was as robust in protein, calories, fat, lactose, and HMOs as term milk from a gestational parent. The prior report also documented comparable levels of macronutrients in the induced milk of a transgender woman compared with those in standard term milk.9,14
"Although HMO profile varies from person to person, the overall HMO content of this induced milk is comparable with standard term human milk. These results show that induced milk from a TGD nongestational parent also produces adequate nutrients for a growing infant. LH and FSH levels were below detection range, suggesting very low, if any, levels of these hormones. This may be due to the hormone therapy suppressing LH and FSH production in transgender women.19"
[...]
"The amount of milk production by the patient in this report would not be enough to solely sustain an infant's nutritional needs. However, since the patient was cofeeding with the gestational parent, this amount aligned with her breastfeeding goals. For this patient, considerations may include reduced pumping sessions around delivery while in the hospital and time constraints with newborn's needs. The prior three published case reports discuss similar findings.7,9,10 Additional research is needed to highlight potential limitations specific to this population."
I assume that the "right hormones" just means progesterone. Trans women usually get given estradiol (oestrogen) only, so will require progesterone too in order produce a reasonable volume of milk. Plenty of cis women take progesterone (the pill!) whilst breastfeeding without ill effects, so I'm not sure why the Telegraph find this surprising...
(Cis men and progesterone-deficient women can often induce lactaction without progesterone supplementation but the volumes produced are very low)
From a brief review of papers, it appears you need something else to induce significant lactation, like domperidone.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
I think those last two posts are a pretty decent summary of the position (there is no fascism without violence, there is often violence associated with a transition to anarchism).
Of course, with any overthrow of an entire system (rather than a change of regime within a system), old (usually) men tend to channel the aggression of young (usually) men to do it. The political philosophy isn't really as important as the sanction to smash some things.
Moeller van den Bruck managed to espouse fascism without violence. It was still fascism.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
So tired of anarchists looking at me, don’t need their credibility.
I woke up feeling refreshed at 10am (dry day before). Did four hours solid work. Picked up Laundry and had a delicious Chinese dumpling lunch (+2 beers)
Came back and was gonna sun bathe but then fell asleep instead for half an hour (not unknown - I like a nap). So I got up refreshed but then almost immediately went back to sleep again and had a dream where my ex girlfriend Sarah xxxx (now an esteemed civil engineer) was now complexly employed by some Indian steel magnate and returned to the age of 19 and she was charging £20 to look up her skirt on the promise she wasn’t wearing any underwear and I agreed the price as it seemed fair and then I woke up
What’s that about?
Face facts, you’re an old git now, the only young girls visiting your bedroom will be the ones delivering your meals on wheels.
Best start looking now for a comfortable sweaters and slippers.
This interpretation did occur to me, but I rejected it on the grounds I dislike slippers
Growing old isn’t fun.
I realised I could retire quite comfortably next year at the age of 46 and that has filled me with dread.
Don't retire early - serious advice
Unless you have some hugely absorbing pastime or some other passionate but iggnored vocation, or a new family you want to spend all your time with then don't retire early. I have a few friends that did, and most got bored quickly, one got V V depressed. Especially at 46. Ridiculously young
I know, I put a lot of work in my early career so I could retire 50 to 55.
I’m getting remarried this year and spend time with the family but I like earning money.
A man needs a purpose. Switch things up a bit, but don't retire entirely? How much golf can one play?
(congratulations, btw)
I was given some sage advise by an old(ish) academic a few years ago. He drew a graph with one line curving downwards and one upwards, intersecting around the age of 60. The message was that you need to start building your second career(s) / pastime(s) from at least your 40s so that these can increasingly take over from the mid 50s onwards while your primary career goes into a slow but gentle glide path. That you should avoid a cliff edge retirement at all costs.
Or have a career which allows you to downscale to work part time over time, and then give up responsibilities. (or go and work for yourself and do what hours and what level of work you want)
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN
Roughly interpreted as 'your footwear will be broken up and the best bits given to TSE'.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
Like you, I'm a huge fan of the right to peaceful protest. However, I fundamentally disagree with your view that it's okay to protest outside people's private residences. Corbyn had to endure this frequently, and it was an unacceptable intrusion into his private life. There's a whole host of fairly obvious reasons that this should be out of bounds. If I were considering standing for public office, the fear that I may be subject to protests outside my family house would be something of a deterrent.
When I annoyed the Mail on Sunday about something they waylaid my wife outside her house and asked her questions obviously designed to provoke something quotable - "This is a small house, I bet you've got a nice villa tucked away somewhere?" and that sort of thing. She had no idea what the issue was about (I'd confirmed that a Tory MP had told a racist joke, and was criticised for disclosing something from a private dinner by a Danish company), so was furious not just with them but with me for exposing her to the ambush. That sort of thing definitely does put people off from any public role.
If you want to protest what someone does in their work, then protest outside their work. In the case of an MP, there’s a blooming big square right outside where they all work.
It should be seen as totally unacceptable to turn up at someone’s house without permission, whether you’re a protestor or a tabloid hack. Politicians are human first and foremost, and having one’s family subject to harassment isn’t what they are signing up to do.
Not just their home. MPs have been harassed while out with family having meals or drinks.
Or even just in public. At the weekend we had Rachel Reeves being harangued by pro Palestine activists going way above and beyond and talking of anarchists remember Rees-Moggs kids being verbally abused by one.
Problem is some people see this as acceptable depending on their view on the issue. If we accept this we normalise it
As women's footie has been mentioned I heard vaguely on the wireless that attendance at some women's football match or other was over 60,000. That is pretty grown up.
No idea what the overall numbers look like outside (presumably) the top few clubs.
Part of it is the price. You can get a good ticket to see a women's match at the Emirates for £15 - that's the adult price, and can be cheaper with an early deal. If you can get a ticket for a men's match at all, you won't get much change from £100. It's a good standard of football, and by no means cripplingly expensive as a family day out.
I think they are quite right to do that - it's going in the right direction, kids will grow up watching the game, and that will gradually filter down to the smaller clubs (and, frankly, allow them to charge less of a giveaway price at Arsenal).
But a bit of caution is needed on the economics of it and getting ahead of ourselves - the gate receipts are still on a different level, and Arsenal Women aren't at this stage playing all games as the Emirates. I'd guess that attendance would cover variable costs (not sure though) but it's got a way to develop yet before it's a business - although it's getting there.
You can see high-flying Leverkusen - unbeaten in all competitions since July and 8 points clear at the top of the Bundesliga - for 15 Euros adult (depending on ticket - most expensive adult ticket is 50 euros). In the 'family block' an adult ticket is 30 euros and children under 13 are 5 euros each. The atmosphere is a bit shit in the BayerArena though it might be better this year as they are playing so well. And Florian Wirtz is quite good - possible star for Germany in the Euros.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, anarchists calling for violent revolution, should they be allowed?
I would personally argue that anarchism doesn't inherently require violence whereas fascism does - anarchist just want the collapse of unjust hierarchies and the people who benefit from such hierarchies could just abdicate their power. When they refuse to abdicate their illegitimate power and use force to keep hold of it, violence typically happens, but it isn't inherent. Fascism has out groups they specifically want to purge from society at large, a purge that cannot happen without violence.
Anarchists don't inherently require violence, but anarchists have often used violence. The 1893 Gran Teatre del Liceu bombing, the 1896 Barcelona Corpus Christi procession bombing, the Thessaloniki bombings of 1903, the 1906 Morral affair, the 1923 Diana Theatre bombing in Milan etc. (OK, those are all from a while back, but that's probably just because anarchism has ceased to be particularly popular.)
I think those last two posts are a pretty decent summary of the position (there is no fascism without violence, there is often violence associated with a transition to anarchism).
Of course, with any overthrow of an entire system (rather than a change of regime within a system), old (usually) men tend to channel the aggression of young (usually) men to do it. The political philosophy isn't really as important as the sanction to smash some things.
I have known a few anarchists, and they tend to be a very varied and loose grouping (which is perhaps why there formed so many varied and loose groupings). Some are true believers in a 'better' system (or a system that they believe is better); whilst others just like the idea of smashing what they see as being the current unfair system, with little care about anyone who gets hurt in the process. And there is a whole range in between.
IANAE, but IMV anarchism is utterly unworkable, as it ignores human nature. Sadly, we are not a race who are always nice and cuddly to one another, and there will always be some who want more than others, whether the 'more' be power, money, sex, or anything else. There will be some who don't want to work, who don't want to do what others say they need to do. The system needs to cater for, and to control, these people. I cannot see how a true anarchist system can do so.
I agree with the comments that it would put me off the company.
I did an interview once where it was just to camera. Questions popped up on screen, had maybe 30 seconds thinking time, then record your response. I declined the second interview as I'd seen enough, as it were.
I get that companies get overwhelmed with applications, but if you've got too many after the paper sift to do interviews with all possibilities with real people then you're not going to gain a great deal from the automated interview - either it's computer assessed based on keywords in which case it's adding little or someone does watch it in which case you save little time (apart from those interview where you know after 5 minutes the candidate is not a match). I don't know whether mine was somehow computer assessed or if a real person watched it back, but it sucked either way. Was about six years back, so any automated assessment must have been rudimentary - I guessed it was a low level flunky with a checklist. I threw buzzword spaghetti into every answer, which must have worked ok as I got invited to the next stage.
I woke up feeling refreshed at 10am (dry day before). Did four hours solid work. Picked up Laundry and had a delicious Chinese dumpling lunch (+2 beers)
Came back and was gonna sun bathe but then fell asleep instead for half an hour (not unknown - I like a nap). So I got up refreshed but then almost immediately went back to sleep again and had a dream where my ex girlfriend Sarah xxxx (now an esteemed civil engineer) was now complexly employed by some Indian steel magnate and returned to the age of 19 and she was charging £20 to look up her skirt on the promise she wasn’t wearing any underwear and I agreed the price as it seemed fair and then I woke up
What’s that about?
Face facts, you’re an old git now, the only young girls visiting your bedroom will be the ones delivering your meals on wheels.
Best start looking now for a comfortable sweaters and slippers.
This interpretation did occur to me, but I rejected it on the grounds I dislike slippers
These might work in an Uncle Monty kinda way?
I have reached the age where the "slip on shoe" has an added appeal, I confess
But I am determined to resist
You start with a Chelsea Boot and it goes downhill from there.
I wore DM Chelsea Boots in the 90s when I was in my late teens/twenties.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
I woke up feeling refreshed at 10am (dry day before). Did four hours solid work. Picked up Laundry and had a delicious Chinese dumpling lunch (+2 beers)
Came back and was gonna sun bathe but then fell asleep instead for half an hour (not unknown - I like a nap). So I got up refreshed but then almost immediately went back to sleep again and had a dream where my ex girlfriend Sarah xxxx (now an esteemed civil engineer) was now complexly employed by some Indian steel magnate and returned to the age of 19 and she was charging £20 to look up her skirt on the promise she wasn’t wearing any underwear and I agreed the price as it seemed fair and then I woke up
What’s that about?
Sounds like you woke up too soon.
You’ll be pleased to know that pb got a glancing reference in the dream
While all the weird skirt shenanigans were going on I had to keep replying to some special group call and response chant someone had devised for everyobe staying in the hotel (it was a dream, bear with me) and lots of the responders were - I sensed, pb-ers
I wonder if the message of this dream is ITS TIME TO GO HOME YOU ARE NOW GOING MAD
The first rule of all social interactions is nobody wants to hear about your dreams.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
Like you, I'm a huge fan of the right to peaceful protest. However, I fundamentally disagree with your view that it's okay to protest outside people's private residences. Corbyn had to endure this frequently, and it was an unacceptable intrusion into his private life. There's a whole host of fairly obvious reasons that this should be out of bounds. If I were considering standing for public office, the fear that I may be subject to protests outside my family house would be something of a deterrent.
When I annoyed the Mail on Sunday about something they waylaid my wife outside her house and asked her questions obviously designed to provoke something quotable - "This is a small house, I bet you've got a nice villa tucked away somewhere?" and that sort of thing. She had no idea what the issue was about (I'd confirmed that a Tory MP had told a racist joke, and was criticised for disclosing something from a private dinner by a Danish company), so was furious not just with them but with me for exposing her to the ambush. That sort of thing definitely does put people off from any public role.
If you want to protest what someone does in their work, then protest outside their work. In the case of an MP, there’s a blooming big square right outside where they all work.
It should be seen as totally unacceptable to turn up at someone’s house without permission, whether you’re a protestor or a tabloid hack. Politicians are human first and foremost, and having one’s family subject to harassment isn’t what they are signing up to do.
Not just their home. MPs have been harassed while out with family having meals or drinks.
Or even just in public. At the weekend we had Rachel Reeves being harangued by pro Palestine activists going way above and beyond and talking of anarchists remember Rees-Moggs kids being verbally abused by one.
Problem is some people see this as acceptable depending on their view on the issue. If we accept this we normalise it
Ellsberg thought it was morally correct to leak classified documents to help end the Vietnam War. He still expected, and was prepared to be sent to prison for doing so.
Whereas this protest is both futile - it won't change UK policy, and even if it did would make little difference - and of seriously dodgy morality.
Just had a package delivered which contains a medium-sized box inside a much, much larger one. It's not quite the comedic value of when I got a Yankee candle in a box four feet long, but it's not far off.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
How about laying siege to Jacob Rees-Mogg's children. All good?
Being a politician is a choice. Outside of one vote every 4-5 years, your representative has no recourse to you as a voter (barring a recall petition). I think, if you want a liberal democracy, protesting your elected officials should be the norm. We can argue about how far away (I'd be happy with, say, the other side of the road rather than outside the front door, for example) or what kinds of protest and when - but in general turning up with a few placards or banners, or even shouting slogans, is not the end of the world when you have the power to vote on things that are literally life and death for people.
But then I'm not a particular fan of representative democracy. I can't remember who said it (maybe Chomsky, maybe Varoufakis), but liberal representative democracy is a smoke and mirrors show to give the appearance of representation of the people. It's a steam valve that is allowed to open up every 4-5 years to release the pressure caused by material political conditions, but the system basically demands that you only release that pressure at times when they say it is okay. This is the gloved iron fist - a pretence at democracy that comes down hard if you dare try to do democracy outside its remit via protest or mass movement and organising.
Surpassing disingenuousness. Of the hundreds of issues this raises, here is just one question. Planet earth is a long and large laboratory of political theory and practice. Which is the nation state of any substantial size (say over 2 million population) that best, even if imperfectly, exemplifies your version of non representative democracy?
Yeah I mean I was going to go back to him on this point. It's Winston Churchill all over again. What other system provides the rights that ours does.
@148grss makes the classic mistake of thinking that "the other side" isn't as hell bent on imposing their system on him as he is on imposing his system on them.
Democracy is the compromise whereby everyone agrees to go with a common system.
Edit: I mean that this needs saying on a politically-inclined website is quite disappointing.
But there are other forms of democracy that is not about individuals forgoing their stake in society to a representative, who forgoes their individual morality to a party, who tend to give up their principles to organised capital (at least in our system).
As I have said before - direct democracy would be great, no problem with that. Even if we couldn't go over night into a direct democracy from what we currently have - we could make steps towards it - workers involved in democracy at work, tenants unions being more common, changing lower levels of government from representative systems to fully communally engaged systems. It would take effort, sure; but I think some things are worth it. And if you don't think that and you want a representative democracy, then at least allowing people to protest their representatives should be fair game?
But you reject the idea of direct democracy to decide immigration policy?
We've had this conversation before. 1) I still think in direct democracy my policy position would prove to be the popular one. 2) A referendum, written before hand by political representatives with state power behind it, alongside a privately owned media apparatus that would feed into it is no my idea of direct democracy - especially when the outcome of such a referendum would still have to be enacted by representatives (in our system).
If we had, for example, community assemblies where everyone spent a lot of time discussing the issue together and came to a consensus - sure. But that isn't a possible reality at the moment.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm an optimist and a utopian and believe (incorrectly) in a general decency that all humans share because, typically, most people just want to get along, see their family and friends and have their material needs met.
How can *everyone* take part in an assembly? Are you not just reinventing representative democracy?
No - everyone means everyone. Again, I'd point to Rojava where they literally knocked on peoples' doors and said their is an assembly, come along - yes that means your wife too, she is a person as well - etc etc. I understand these things are difficult to imagine with the confines of the system we live in that alienates us from our neighbours and our communities, where neighbours are strangers and the people you work with are dispersed across miles and miles because everyone can commute and therefore your work links are not your social links and so on. But it can happen.
There's a lot of Rojava hagiography. It's not quite the utopia you present.
It reminds me of the stuff that the very online libertarians used to spout when I was a teenager.
Somaliland used to be their thing. No government! Zero taxes! No authority save for contracts entered into voluntarily and enforced by private courts!
They all claimed to be in the process of moving there or starting businesses there, but when you pressed them for their travel plans it turned out that they were actually too busy seasteading in international waters, building armed-to-the-teeth space stations, or whatever.
Years later I dated someone who was born in Hargeisa, and still has family there. Despite them being vastly more privileged than most people there, it turns out that their experience of the place was rather different to the picture painted by the idealists...
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Not wearing shoes in the house is one of many positive innovations to my life resulting from being married to an Asian woman. I love a nice comfy pair of slippers.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
A prize winning entry for disingenuousness. The idea that it is simple to distinguish between a peaceful howling mob of 10,000 and an intimidating howling mob of 10,000 outside your house is magnificent in its simplicity.
I suspect also that most supporters of the howling mob outside the houses of MPs and district councillors will want to distinguish between an extreme left wing and progressive peace loving howling mob and an extreme right wing peace loving howling mob.
The rest of us just want freedom of speech, the rule of law and the ballot box.
I found it amusing that when the first Countryside Marches occurred a couple of harden protest types I knew were outraged.
They felt intimidated, oppressed, threatened.
To them, that was something them did to other people - they were fine with “mask up and throw things at the police”. When they were doing it.
People marching *against* what they saw as their cause was - Not Right.
Again, I disagree. People marching for things and being involved in politics is good - as long as what they're marching for / how they're organising isn't violent. Which is why basically the only groups I don't think should be allowed to organised are street fascists - their political ideology is inherently violent, and typically even when they say they're going for a peaceful march they still get boozed up and like to throw punches at random people.
So, what's your position on the Northern Ireland Parades Commission? It should be disbanded and everyone should be allowed to walk peacefully and play music in the street wherever and whenever they like, right?
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
As women's footie has been mentioned I heard vaguely on the wireless that attendance at some women's football match or other was over 60,000. That is pretty grown up.
No idea what the overall numbers look like outside (presumably) the top few clubs.
Part of it is the price. You can get a good ticket to see a women's match at the Emirates for £15 - that's the adult price, and can be cheaper with an early deal. If you can get a ticket for a men's match at all, you won't get much change from £100. It's a good standard of football, and by no means cripplingly expensive as a family day out.
I think they are quite right to do that - it's going in the right direction, kids will grow up watching the game, and that will gradually filter down to the smaller clubs (and, frankly, allow them to charge less of a giveaway price at Arsenal).
But a bit of caution is needed on the economics of it and getting ahead of ourselves - the gate receipts are still on a different level, and Arsenal Women aren't at this stage playing all games as the Emirates. I'd guess that attendance would cover variable costs (not sure though) but it's got a way to develop yet before it's a business - although it's getting there.
You can see high-flying Leverkusen - unbeaten in all competitions since July and 8 points clear at the top of the Bundesliga - for 15 Euros adult (depending on ticket - most expensive adult ticket is 50 euros). In the 'family block' an adult ticket is 30 euros and children under 13 are 5 euros each. The atmosphere is a bit shit in the BayerArena though it might be better this year as they are playing so well. And Florian Wirtz is quite good - possible star for Germany in the Euros.
I went to see Man U women vs Man City women last December at Old Trafford with my daughter and her football team and various other parents. £15, it was, which I thought was still quite good value but significantly more expensive than last year (when I think it was a fiver). I can’t remember what the attendance was, but it was certainly over 40,000. I genuinely prefer the experience of watching women’s football to watching men’s football. I don’t mind partisanship, but I don’t like the tribality of men’s football, though I accept that for many that’s what they do like. And while it would be an exaggeration to say that everyone involved in men’s football is angry all the time, even when they’re happy – it’s not much of one. You don’t really get that so much in women’s football.
Sadly all the things I liked about women’s football – the cheapness, the lack of tribality, the lack of anger – seem to be ebbing away a bit as it becomes more like men’s football. I was kind of turned off the match when the crowd set about booing City players when they were taking corners. It didn’t seem to be directed at the evils, perceived or otherwise, of any particular player, it seemed to being done on general principles. Pipe down you fools – she doesn’t come and boo you when you’re at work. And also – well, it took place in Old Trafford (football) stadium, which is just plastered with inanity and tribalism and childishness in a way football fans probably don’t really notice but which is a bit jarring to anyone used to any other live sport. It makes the Hundred grown up. I’m certainly not saying I wouldn’t go again, but I like it less than I did last year.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
You sound sensible to me. I’m notorious, though, for odd-ball opinions!
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes I am still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
"Plan to Ban" here of course meaning issue non-binding guidance to do what is already standard practice. Yet another signal to the Tory voting bloc, who haven't had kids in schools for decades, that government failure in education is entirely the fault of new-fangled modernity.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
Ive asked several times on this forum why Bad Enoch should be considered a future leadership candidate. She is beyond hopeless. Wooden, boring, invisible.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
Ive asked several times on this forum why Bad Enoch should be considered a future leadership candidate. She is beyond hopeless. Wooden, boring, invisible.
What exactly do people see in her?
She talks about how evil Woke is and has libertarian beliefs.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
Whilst I think any threats of violence are unacceptable - I also think it is completely fine to protest someone who was a soldier in another army (or, indeed, our army) based on the acts of that army / state. If anything I think more people should be protesting their MPs at their surgeries or houses for their beliefs and votes - they are supposed to represent us and when they don't, peaceful protest is a pretty reasonable response. This being the husband of an MP is a bit of a grey area - the MP is the public figure here, not his husband - but in principle, again, I'm not against it.
This kind of feels like SCOTUS post Dobbs when people turned up to protest at their houses and they started getting their knickers in a twist. Peaceful protesters (and I do want to highlight peaceful here before people claim I am defending death threats or whatever) protesting your actions when you have significant power over others is fair.
How about laying siege to Jacob Rees-Mogg's children. All good?
Being a politician is a choice. Outside of one vote every 4-5 years, your representative has no recourse to you as a voter (barring a recall petition). I think, if you want a liberal democracy, protesting your elected officials should be the norm. We can argue about how far away (I'd be happy with, say, the other side of the road rather than outside the front door, for example) or what kinds of protest and when - but in general turning up with a few placards or banners, or even shouting slogans, is not the end of the world when you have the power to vote on things that are literally life and death for people.
But then I'm not a particular fan of representative democracy. I can't remember who said it (maybe Chomsky, maybe Varoufakis), but liberal representative democracy is a smoke and mirrors show to give the appearance of representation of the people. It's a steam valve that is allowed to open up every 4-5 years to release the pressure caused by material political conditions, but the system basically demands that you only release that pressure at times when they say it is okay. This is the gloved iron fist - a pretence at democracy that comes down hard if you dare try to do democracy outside its remit via protest or mass movement and organising.
Would you defend the use of this approach by people who had diametrically opposite views about policy to you?
And who think it's fine to invade your house and sit in your kitchen to make the point.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
I've no objection to comfort and practicality per se - no problem with combats or a Thom Yorke look. But you wouldn't have seen 90s era Thom Yorke in crocs. (I had a pair of camo combats when I was 18 - loved them, though people mocked.)
I think most people (male, at least) decides by the age of about 21 how they prefer to dress and sticks with it. It is a recurrent lament of mine that the clothes industry keeps changing their products (with a few honourable exceptions). All I want is a replacement for the clothing item which just wore out, exactly the same. The image we used to have of people in their 40s in sensible clothes; they probably dressed that way when they were in their early 20s. (My Dad, who is now in his late 70s, still dresses in exactly the same styles and colours as he did when he was in his late 20s - light blue/beige/greys; v-neck jumper, t-shirt, non-jeans casual trousers. Always.)
I'm 48: I've managed to say roughly the same shape as I was in my late teens (though I was pretty stocky to start with) but my hair started abandoning me a few years ago and I reckon I've no more than 5 years left with it. It's mildly sad, but I never really had 'good' hair to start with and in retrospect should have gone with a number 1 all over even when it was plentiful.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
Interesting you have that assessment of Ms Keegan - the Graun [edit] could be read as implying that (the headline for their feed), but not having heard the interview I did wonder.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes I am still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
All in the general scope of anxiety dreams: the fear of being unprepared, late, exposed or embarrassed.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
I agree with the comments that it would put me off the company.
I did an interview once where it was just to camera. Questions popped up on screen, had maybe 30 seconds thinking time, then record your response. I declined the second interview as I'd seen enough, as it were.
I get that companies get overwhelmed with applications, but if you've got too many after the paper sift to do interviews with all possibilities with real people then you're not going to gain a great deal from the automated interview - either it's computer assessed based on keywords in which case it's adding little or someone does watch it in which case you save little time (apart from those interview where you know after 5 minutes the candidate is not a match). I don't know whether mine was somehow computer assessed or if a real person watched it back, but it sucked either way. Was about six years back, so any automated assessment must have been rudimentary - I guessed it was a low level flunky with a checklist. I threw buzzword spaghetti into every answer, which must have worked ok as I got invited to the next stage.
The main risk with AI is humans misusing the technology.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
How much is the Post Office worth? Could the compensation be funded by flogging it off? Not sure I can see why it should be publicly-owned - the universal service obligation bit sits with Royal Mail, which is already in private hands.
Someone should do a Nazi sketch where Hitler inspects his new SS regiment with great approval, then belatedly discovers they are all wearing crocs, and the Oberleutnant tries to explain to the enraged Fuhrer that "crocs are really comfy, tho"
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
You seem to have erroneously included the words "professional" and "expert" in your tale.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
Maybe it was the wipe-clean aspect which appealed to this individual, given his job? Because it occurs to me that the one circumstance in which seeing adults in crocs is not jarring is in hospitals.
Also easily removable, which I suppose is a boon in the circumstances.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
Maybe it was the wipe-clean aspect which appealed to this individual, given his job? Because it occurs to me that the one circumstance in which seeing adults in crocs is not jarring is in hospitals.
I do agree that he probably misjudged though!
Chefs wear them, as well - for the same reason, really easy to keep clean, and really comfy if you are on your feet for umpteen hours
But sexually arousing, and dominantly masculine? Ah, no
Also women are really responsive - in good and bad ways - to male footwear. I have female friends who will dump a guy, or dismiss him as a possible date, if he wears terrible shoes
"Plan to Ban" here of course meaning issue non-binding guidance to do what is already standard practice. Yet another signal to the Tory voting bloc, who haven't had kids in schools for decades, that government failure in education is entirely the fault of new-fangled modernity.
TBF they do have grandchildren to annoy them when the gc insist on texting their friends at Christmas dinner table.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Christ. We need an election and we need one now. This is dire.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
How much is the Post Office worth? Could the compensation be funded by flogging it off? Not sure I can see why it should be publicly-owned - the universal service obligation bit sits with Royal Mail, which is already in private hands.
I suspect the theoretical possibility of privatisation made the senior managers see £ signs and keep shtum about the Horizon issues. A normal civil service department would not have acted in the same way.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I have a recurring dream in which one of my grandparents has died and, unlike my immediate family, I failed to secure a ticket for the funeral in time.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
The problem with that theory is that the U.K. Government budget is 1.2 Trillion.
3 1/3rd billion - per day. 1 billion used to be real money….
The resistance to the payouts is systemic and a very old problem.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Christ. We need an election and we need one now. This is dire.
Indonesia just had one, oddly enough. Election, that is.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
How much is the Post Office worth? Could the compensation be funded by flogging it off? Not sure I can see why it should be publicly-owned - the universal service obligation bit sits with Royal Mail, which is already in private hands.
I suspect the theoretical possibility of privatisation made the senior managers see £ signs and keep shtum about the Horizon issues. A normal civil service department would not have acted in the same way.
“normal civil service department(s)” have been denying people their due since Thomas Cromwell was running things. Probably before.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
A man cannot spend too much on shoes. It is never money wasted, the more you spend, the better they are, the better they look. AND the longer they last. And women appreciate them
My most expensive pair was about £700 and I still have them, they are nearly 20 years old, they still look great (indeed they get better with age, perhaps, developing a patina), and people will still say Nice shoes when I am flaneuring in them
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Oddly enough, I was thinking of that. Britain has had a film and television industry for over a century, but the most erotic thing it's ever produced was Dobby and David Mitchell in the cupboard. Heartbreaking pathos it has coming out of its arse, dark comedy to rage the gates of heaven, but when it comes to sex it's basically Julie Walters in a nighty and slippers.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Oddly enough, I was thinking of that. Britain has had a film and television industry for over a century, but the most erotic thing it's ever produced was Dobby and David Mitchell in the cupboard. Heartbreaking pathos it has coming out of its arse, dark comedy to rage the gates of heaven, but when it comes to sex it's basically Julie Walters in a nighty and slippers.
It's true, I think it is our tendency to self deprecating humour. We never take ourselves seriously enough. This is generally a good thing, but it does not make for good erotica, you generally can't mix jokes with proper sex
The French take themselves all-too-seriously, but it means they can do good erotica. Story of O. Je t'aime. History of the Eye, etc
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Oddly enough, I was thinking of that. Britain has had a film and television industry for over a century, but the most erotic thing it's ever produced was Dobby and David Mitchell in the cupboard. Heartbreaking pathos it has coming out of its arse, dark comedy to rage the gates of heaven, but when it comes to sex it's basically Julie Walters in a nighty and slippers.
C’mon, Babs Windsor’s bikini top pinging off, phwoarrr!
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
How much is the Post Office worth? Could the compensation be funded by flogging it off? Not sure I can see why it should be publicly-owned - the universal service obligation bit sits with Royal Mail, which is already in private hands.
Someone described the Post Office as a huge scandal with a medium sized retail operation attached. It has no effective commercial value, which means the government has to sort out the mess
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
I will never fail to be saddened by the gap between sexual practices and the dreary domestic reality. It was Terry Pratchett (probably) that pointed out that it's like starving people fantasising about increasingly elaborate banquets, whereas what they actually want is roast beef on Sundays with potatoes, gravy and peas.
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
Oddly enough, I was thinking of that. Britain has had a film and television industry for over a century, but the most erotic thing it's ever produced was Dobby and David Mitchell in the cupboard. Heartbreaking pathos it has coming out of its arse, dark comedy to rage the gates of heaven, but when it comes to sex it's basically Julie Walters in a nighty and slippers.
C’mon, Babs Windsor’s bikini top pinging off, phwoarrr!
That's it, exactly
Sex is seen as something comedic. Tits! Hahahah
Cue sarcastic trombone music
Our national tendency to make a joke of everything is probably a good thing, but it definitely has it flaws
The Nethanyahu regimes excercise in Gaza should, within the next 6 weeks, move to a different, lower intensity, phase. T
"Military chiefs believe they can significantly damage Hamas' remaining capabilities in that time, paving the way for a shift to a lower-intensity phase of targeted airstrikes and special forces operations, according to the two Israeli and two regional officials who asked to remain anonymous to speak freely."
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
The key is to keep a notebook right by your bed, and write them down as SOON as you wake up, you will have about five minutes before they dissolve forever
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
The cost of doing the right thing won’t be cheap (probably over an £bn) and probably requires delaying a tax cut for a few months / a year to cover the total cost of them.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
How much is the Post Office worth? Could the compensation be funded by flogging it off? Not sure I can see why it should be publicly-owned - the universal service obligation bit sits with Royal Mail, which is already in private hands.
Someone described the Post Office as a huge scandal with a medium sized retail operation attached. It has no effective commercial value, which means the government has to sort out the mess
Idea - sell the Post Office managers into slavery and use the proceeds to compensate the Post Masters.
This would
1) Compensate the Post Masters 2) Punish the managers 3) Convert the SPMs into Evul Rich Imperialists, so we don’t have to feel sorry for them anymore.
What’s not to like?
Hmmm…. Phone number for the Libyan Coastguard, anyone?
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
Interesting you have that assessment of Ms Keegan - the Graun [edit] could be read as implying that (the headline for their feed), but not having heard the interview I did wonder.
It’s one of two things,
1) utter blithering incompetence in an interview, to end up throwing a beloved colleague under a bus 2) being part of a government where colleagues from the other (the head banging wing) of the party are doing things that actually disgust you (not in my name, not my politics) so you accidentally on purpose end up throwing that colleague under a bus.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
When I was in HK I befriended a couple of working girls. BDSM bookings were their favourite because they would turn up to an invariably high powered executive and just sit on the sofa while instructing their clients to do the cleaning, washing up, etc.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
I've no objection to comfort and practicality per se - no problem with combats or a Thom Yorke look. But you wouldn't have seen 90s era Thom Yorke in crocs. (I had a pair of camo combats when I was 18 - loved them, though people mocked.)
I think most people (male, at least) decides by the age of about 21 how they prefer to dress and sticks with it. It is a recurrent lament of mine that the clothes industry keeps changing their products (with a few honourable exceptions). All I want is a replacement for the clothing item which just wore out, exactly the same. The image we used to have of people in their 40s in sensible clothes; they probably dressed that way when they were in their early 20s. (My Dad, who is now in his late 70s, still dresses in exactly the same styles and colours as he did when he was in his late 20s - light blue/beige/greys; v-neck jumper, t-shirt, non-jeans casual trousers. Always.)
I'm 48: I've managed to say roughly the same shape as I was in my late teens (though I was pretty stocky to start with) but my hair started abandoning me a few years ago and I reckon I've no more than 5 years left with it. It's mildly sad, but I never really had 'good' hair to start with and in retrospect should have gone with a number 1 all over even when it was plentiful.
No, you're right re Thom Yorke and the crocs - but their shape is, to my eye anyway, reminiscent of the bulky skater-type trainers he rocked with the combats, that's where I was coming from.
Some men I think update their style really well as they age. Out go the combats or jeans and the trainers and in come classic but stylish boots, Loake or something, and well cut trousers, nice shirts and maybe even a cheeky waistcoat. Often accompanied with a beard. If still slim, perhaps a nice suit. And I kind of admire that approach. It's prevalent in the pricier bars in Leeds. Richard Hawley always dresses well, for example. But sadly I don't think it's for me. That would get me some stick down the local. If I can get away with wearing crocs 95% of the time you can imagine how often I would fit in wearing clobber like that.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
The key is to keep a notebook right by your bed, and write them down as SOON as you wake up, you will have about five minutes before they dissolve forever
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
Freud? Freud? Meaningful dreams were in the bible FFS. Pharaoh, Joseph, they were all at it thousands of years before Freud.
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
The key is to keep a notebook right by your bed, and write them down as SOON as you wake up, you will have about five minutes before they dissolve forever
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
My strangest daughter was plagued by bad dreams when she was smaller. In particular, there was a cast of baddies: the rooster and the gazelle are the two I remember. Having a five year old waking up sobbing because of the gazelle is both heart-rending and deeply surreal. She was quite scared to go to sleep. And then, when she was about six, she managed - in her dream - to do some sort of deal with them; I think she challenged the gazelle to a running race, and if she won, the gazelle would agree not to bother her again. She won (though she may have cheated), and has slept well ever since. ISTR there were some other details which made the whole thing odder still, but other people's dreams are even harder to remember than your own. I don't know what to conclude from all this apart from that dreams are odd and so is my daughter.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
Very nice. Those things you stick on the holes, the charms, the stars like in the pic, are called a 'Jibbitz' - you can even get little headlights.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
Fair.
I hate slippers. I have never worn them since old enough to make my own footwear decisions, and also find them depressing and ugly on other people. There are no good slippers, at least for men. There are only bad slippers and worse slippers. (The worst being those with no backs on which would come flying off with any sufficiently vigorous forward movement of the foot. What’s the point of them?) I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.) In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
Treat yourself to a pair of Crocs. Ignore the haters. Your feet will love you.
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
There are Crocs for every occasion
A friend of mine is quite the sexual adventuress. She actually wrote a book about it
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
When I was in HK I befriended a couple of working girls. BDSM bookings were their favourite because they would turn up to an invariably high powered executive and just sit on the sofa while instructing their clients to do the cleaning, washing up, etc.
And then they would leave, many $$$ to the good.
Indeed
The ultimate form of this is "findoms", where domme women literally demand money from rich men, for all sorts of insane reasons, and the men hand it over, and get some masochistic pleasure from being cruelly exploited. Sometimes there is no physical or sexual interaction, the pleasure of being financially robbed and humiliated is enough for the man
I guess these are generally men who are super alpha, dominant and successful in life, perhaps quite ruthless (hence the money), who need something to balance it?
Same way cruel high court judges like to be spanked, and so on
The Nethanyahu regimes excercise in Gaza should, within the next 6 weeks, move to a different, lower intensity, phase. T
"Military chiefs believe they can significantly damage Hamas' remaining capabilities in that time, paving the way for a shift to a lower-intensity phase of targeted airstrikes and special forces operations, according to the two Israeli and two regional officials who asked to remain anonymous to speak freely."
1) the operation to free the hostages and crush Hamas has killed more hostages than freed, and can’t find the Hamas leadership (because they are not in Gaza, they’re in Turkey). 2) ceasefires that were freeing hostages have been torpedoed by a minority extremist grouping in Israel
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
The key is to keep a notebook right by your bed, and write them down as SOON as you wake up, you will have about five minutes before they dissolve forever
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
Freud? Freud? Meaningful dreams were in the bible FFS. Pharaoh, Joseph, they were all at it thousands of years before Freud.
Dreams have been a huge part of Aboriginal Australian culture for millennia. This film is all about it:
My dream meanwhile was that I was invited to DJ at a night club but I had brought the wrong records (a bunch of David Bowie and Iggy Pop LPs) and everyone was waiting to get the party started but all I could play was Let's Dance (good, this got everyone on the dancefloor) then that was it. I tried Funtime (interestingly, maybe, the song I used to have played on my White Collar ring walks) but people weren't having any of it and I was reduced to putting the TV on where Friends was showing but by that time people had drifted away and the club emptied.
What was that about.
Edit: if I'd thought about it, Young Americans would have kept them moving for another few minutes.
I am actually quite good at dream interpretation - I used to keep a dream diary as a disturbed teen and got the hang of it
The essence of your dream is fear of age (as is mine, by the way), but your nuance is that YOU still feel young - Young Americans! - but that everyone has grown old AROUND you - they've stopped dancing - indeed they've become a bit boring and predictable - they wanna watch reruns of Friends, they are your old Friends - and even then they go home early
Sounds like you need some NEW friends
I've a re-occurring dream that I've had for years. In it there's always some sort of academic course that I suddenly realize I've been completely neglecting - haven't been turning up to the lectures, haven't been handing in any essays - so, in panic, I have to journey to the school/college to rectify the situation, which I'm never able to do. (When I awake I remember the world of education is long behind me and feel relieved.)
Everyone has those dreams. Sometimes accompanied by turning up to the exam naked. Essentially the basis for John Cleese's Clockwise.
Do they? I do. I often also dream I am in a meeting naked and I am worried that people might notice, sometimes while still in bed. However when I tell people they think I am barking, so I assumed these dreams were rare. I have never dreamed of my teeth falling out which I understand is common.
They are all amongst the most common dream motifs
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I love the flying dreams. Usually quite close to ground level and seemingly easy, based on just walking in an airborne way. For me it tends to be associated with a period of confidence and optimism.
I thought it was just me who had dreams like that! I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
They are incredibly common, and common across cultures as well - practically a human universal
I rarely remember my dreams. When I wake up I know I have dreamt and it remains with me and within a few hours I cannot remember it at all
The key is to keep a notebook right by your bed, and write them down as SOON as you wake up, you will have about five minutes before they dissolve forever
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
Freud? Freud? Meaningful dreams were in the bible FFS. Pharaoh, Joseph, they were all at it thousands of years before Freud.
Of course, but Freud brought science to bear on it, and some kind of explanation for WHY and HOW dreams are so important
Have you read The Interpretation of Dreams?
It is remarkable how many people have not. It is a foundational text of modern civilisation, of human society, and it is ALSO brilliantly interesting and full of mad stories: it's properly fun to read
"Military chiefs believe they can significantly damage Hamas' remaining capabilities in that time, paving the way for a shift to a lower-intensity phase of targeted airstrikes and special forces operations, according to the two Israeli and two regional officials who asked to remain anonymous to speak freely."
This is exactly the same shit that was spouted for about the first three years of the Iraqstravaganza.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
Interesting you have that assessment of Ms Keegan - the Graun [edit] could be read as implying that (the headline for their feed), but not having heard the interview I did wonder.
It’s one of two things,
1) utter blithering incompetence in an interview, to end up throwing a beloved colleague under a bus 2) being part of a government where colleagues from the other (the head banging wing) of the party are doing things that actually disgust you (not in my name, not my politics) so you accidentally on purpose end up throwing that colleague under a bus.
Could easily be both.
I doubt that GK would go out of her way to stop KB being thrown under a bus. The incompetence is not being able to hide that.
But then again- if Badenoch has run out in front of the number 87A, what could a ministerial colleague say?
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
I hope you enjoy your exile on ConHome.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
Are slippers for old people? I’ve always worn slippers (and slip-ons for that matter; Vans are my go-to shoe).
It’s probably just my own personal prejudice intruding
My dad always wore weirdly rubbish cheap shoes (despite becoming seriously wealthy)
But at least they were sometimes proper shoes. I felt his personal decline really kicked in when he gave up lace or buckled shoes entirely and went for slip on shoes that cost £8 from Asda
So I associate those shoes with senescence (obviously the £300 velvet loafer is a different matter - probably)
I bought a pair of crocs last year to wear schlepping about the house and garden. I promised myself I would not go out in public in the damn things.
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
Everyone has judged you. The judgement is not favourable.
You sound sensible to me. I’m notorious, though, for odd-ball opinions!
odd-ball
RU Hitler?
No. Trotsky possibly. I’m very wary of people carrying ice-axes.
Comments
By God, they're comfy.
So they're on my feet pretty much all the time. Pub, nipping to the shops, whatever. Only time I don't wear them is when dog walking or the one day a week in the office.
Don't judge me.
The requirement that you have lots of free time to rock up at the market place and vote is, of course, great for the rich. Not so great for the chap who doesn’t own a horse and lives 150 miles from Rome.
More recently, groups of retired councillors have deliberately forced out younger people by holding all the council meetings in working hours.
It should be seen as totally unacceptable to turn up at someone’s house without permission, whether you’re a protestor or a tabloid hack. Politicians are human first and foremost, and having one’s family subject to harassment isn’t what they are signing up to do.
I’m notorious, though, for odd-ball opinions!
(Cis men and progesterone-deficient women can often induce lactaction without progesterone supplementation but the volumes produced are very low)
https://x.com/revpaulwhite/status/1759348734838632752?s=61
Of course, with any overthrow of an entire system (rather than a change of regime within a system), old (usually) men tend to channel the aggression of young (usually) men to do it. The political philosophy isn't really as important as the sanction to smash some things.
Destroy they say, defy, condemn
As long as you don’t destroy them.
Roughly interpreted as 'your footwear will be broken up and the best bits given to TSE'.
Or even just in public. At the weekend we had Rachel Reeves being harangued by pro Palestine activists going way above and beyond and talking of anarchists remember Rees-Moggs kids being verbally abused by one.
Problem is some people see this as acceptable depending on their view on the issue. If we accept this we normalise it
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/12/jacob-rees-mogg-and-his-family-harassed-by-activists
IANAE, but IMV anarchism is utterly unworkable, as it ignores human nature. Sadly, we are not a race who are always nice and cuddly to one another, and there will always be some who want more than others, whether the 'more' be power, money, sex, or anything else. There will be some who don't want to work, who don't want to do what others say they need to do. The system needs to cater for, and to control, these people. I cannot see how a true anarchist system can do so.
One dissident soul could destroy a nirvana.
I did an interview once where it was just to camera. Questions popped up on screen, had maybe 30 seconds thinking time, then record your response. I declined the second interview as I'd seen enough, as it were.
I get that companies get overwhelmed with applications, but if you've got too many after the paper sift to do interviews with all possibilities with real people then you're not going to gain a great deal from the automated interview - either it's computer assessed based on keywords in which case it's adding little or someone does watch it in which case you save little time (apart from those interview where you know after 5 minutes the candidate is not a match). I don't know whether mine was somehow computer assessed or if a real person watched it back, but it sucked either way. Was about six years back, so any automated assessment must have been rudimentary - I guessed it was a low level flunky with a checklist. I threw buzzword spaghetti into every answer, which must have worked ok as I got invited to the next stage.
I tend to wear shoes when indoors, and I do accept there is an argument for keeping your floors clean by not doing so while also keeping your feet warm. But to me this is dwarfed by the aesthetic arguments. (But who will see them when you’re in your own house? Well, the one woman whose views on my appearance I care about.)
In fact, I can’t truly be comfortable in apparel that I couldn’t instantly answer a sudden call for action of some sort. I’m not really one for pyjamas or nightwear – even when sleeping, I’m most comfortable in a t-shirt and joggers (though obviously this can only be done in winter). I’m at my most comfortable when in clothes I could, if need be, clamber over a fence in, without losing the contents of my pockets (I always slightly marvel at men who, in hot weather, wear shorts without pockets and flip flops). Some sort of t-shirt, a hoody if needed for warmth, jeans or combats or combat-shorts, and trainers, works best.
One of my daughters has an oversized pair of Nessie slippers bought from a souvenir shop in Scotland. I concede that they’re quite jolly, actually. But I’m no more going to be wearing novelty slippers than old man slippers.
I dread the day I lose the ability to tie my shoelaces.
He still expected, and was prepared to be sent to prison for doing so.
Whereas this protest is both futile - it won't change UK policy, and even if it did would make little difference - and of seriously dodgy morality.
Somaliland used to be their thing. No government! Zero taxes! No authority save for contracts entered into voluntarily and enforced by private courts!
They all claimed to be in the process of moving there or starting businesses there, but when you pressed them for their travel plans it turned out that they were actually too busy seasteading in international waters, building armed-to-the-teeth space stations, or whatever.
Years later I dated someone who was born in Hargeisa, and still has family there. Despite them being vastly more privileged than most people there, it turns out that their experience of the place was rather different to the picture painted by the idealists...
I bought a couple of pairs of camo patterned combats a couple of years ago, basically to walk the dogs in, but like the Crocs I tend to live in them now. I've bought two more pairs. They are so convenient - leg pockets full of dog poo bags and biscuits. And comfy. With the combats and the Crocs, and a T-shirt, always a T-shirt, I kind of dress like an OK Computer era Thom Yorke.
Or if I want to look slightly more acceptable I find myself dressing like a Parklife era Damon Albarn. I have a weakness for Sergio Tacchini trackie tops.
When I was a nipper you'd occasionally see an old boy who'd refused to move on from the Teddy Boy fashions of his youth, with a grey, thinning DA forlornly crowning the now-wrinkled face. I always found them faintly ridiculous.
Yet I now seem to be dressing much like I did in my mid/late-90s pomp. I'm 46 this week, I should be in sensible brogues and elasticated waists by now.
At least the 90s are cool at the mo.
And, thank the Lord, my hair is - touch wood - not going anywhere. And I'm still a 32 waist. So there's that.
It speaks a lot for Tory disunity right now that Gillian Keegan came to interviews with a plan to push Badenoch right into the smelly stuff today. The battle for the soul of the Conservative Party has already begun, hasn’t it. If you are going to tell us what Keegan done is not one wing of the Tory Party stitching up another wing with a “put up your evidence or shut up” then explain what is.
What’s damaging for the Conservatives is where this story goes - not just holding up payments for postmasters and postmistresses, but this PB header asks “are also delaying compensation for the victims of contaminated blood for the same reason, too?”
The PO scandal and Blood scandal payments would be a mere fraction of the cost of tax cuts announced in the budget in a few weeks time - but if the leaderoftheopposition (all one word) opens their reply with “you are funding these tax cuts with the compensation payments to the PO scandal victims and the blood scandal victims” the opposition are likely to get away with that linkage aren’t they, completely discrediting the pre election tax cuts.
If the government plan an Autumn election, they will have to make these payments before it, and satisfy Mr Bates with the settlement.
I genuinely prefer the experience of watching women’s football to watching men’s football. I don’t mind partisanship, but I don’t like the tribality of men’s football, though I accept that for many that’s what they do like. And while it would be an exaggeration to say that everyone involved in men’s football is angry all the time, even when they’re happy – it’s not much of one. You don’t really get that so much in women’s football.
Sadly all the things I liked about women’s football – the cheapness, the lack of tribality, the lack of anger – seem to be ebbing away a bit as it becomes more like men’s football. I was kind of turned off the match when the crowd set about booing City players when they were taking corners. It didn’t seem to be directed at the evils, perceived or otherwise, of any particular player, it seemed to being done on general principles. Pipe down you fools – she doesn’t come and boo you when you’re at work.
And also – well, it took place in Old Trafford (football) stadium, which is just plastered with inanity and tribalism and childishness in a way football fans probably don’t really notice but which is a bit jarring to anyone used to any other live sport. It makes the Hundred grown up.
I’m certainly not saying I wouldn’t go again, but I like it less than I did last year.
RU Hitler?
The correctness, or otherwise, of the wearing of slip-on footwear
"Plan to Ban" here of course meaning issue non-binding guidance to do what is already standard practice.
Yet another signal to the Tory voting bloc, who haven't had kids in schools for decades, that government failure in education is entirely the fault of new-fangled modernity.
What exactly do people see in her?
!. The missed but hugely important appointment: an exam is particularly common
2. Being naked in public
3. Losing teeth
All revelations of anxiety about social status, or ageing, etc,
On a more positive note, dreams of flying are also common, and they are some of the rare dreams that can be really enjoyable, especially if you can master lucid dreaming - and take control of the dream, while still dreaming
I've done it a couple of times
I think most people (male, at least) decides by the age of about 21 how they prefer to dress and sticks with it. It is a recurrent lament of mine that the clothes industry keeps changing their products (with a few honourable exceptions). All I want is a replacement for the clothing item which just wore out, exactly the same. The image we used to have of people in their 40s in sensible clothes; they probably dressed that way when they were in their early 20s.
(My Dad, who is now in his late 70s, still dresses in exactly the same styles and colours as he did when he was in his late 20s - light blue/beige/greys; v-neck jumper, t-shirt, non-jeans casual trousers. Always.)
I'm 48: I've managed to say roughly the same shape as I was in my late teens (though I was pretty stocky to start with) but my hair started abandoning me a few years ago and I reckon I've no more than 5 years left with it. It's mildly sad, but I never really had 'good' hair to start with and in retrospect should have gone with a number 1 all over even when it was plentiful.
But it’s the morally correct thing to do so clearly this Government won’t be doing that
As part of her experimentation, she thought she'd find out what it might be like to be sexually dominated - "dommed" - by a professional dom. An expert in the Satanic but rhapsodic arts of BDSM
She she found someone on line, and he came highly recommended, and she made an appointment. Then she went round to his professional dungeon, complete with whips, chains, leather horses, four poster bed, handcuffs, and he was ok looking with a leather waistcoat and she went with it, and they began the session with him saying "Right, slut, kneel at my feet and obey me"
So she got down on her knees and prepared to be dommed but as she was on her knees she looked at his feet and realised he was wearing..... bright green crocs
Now, however comfy crocs might be, what they are not is Alpha Male Footwear. They are not SS jackboots, or Hells Angel biker boots, they aren't even the cruel velvet loafers of the posh and twisted English decadent. They are crocs
She burst out laughing and the session ended early
Also easily removable, which I suppose is a boon in the circumstances.
I do agree that he probably misjudged though!
But sexually arousing, and dominantly masculine? Ah, no
Also women are really responsive - in good and bad ways - to male footwear. I have female friends who will dump a guy, or dismiss him as a possible date, if he wears terrible shoes
There seems to be something in the British character that makes Brits very bad at the elaborate stuff but - oddly - very good at the adequate-penetration-and-cuddle-after version.
3 1/3rd billion - per day. 1 billion used to be real money….
The resistance to the payouts is systemic and a very old problem.
PB is 20 next month and yours is the worst post in PB’s history.
Wearing Crocs is worse than putting pineapple on pizza.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSBuPTLh8BE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Indonesian_general_election
I also have the ones in Leon's checklist.
Read up on the compensation for Aberfan.
A man cannot spend too much on shoes. It is never money wasted, the more you spend, the better they are, the better they look. AND the longer they last. And women appreciate them
My most expensive pair was about £700 and I still have them, they are nearly 20 years old, they still look great (indeed they get better with age, perhaps, developing a patina), and people will still say Nice shoes when I am flaneuring in them
The French take themselves all-too-seriously, but it means they can do good erotica. Story of O. Je t'aime. History of the Eye, etc
Sex is seen as something comedic. Tits! Hahahah
Cue sarcastic trombone music
Our national tendency to make a joke of everything is probably a good thing, but it definitely has it flaws
See also: British politics
"Military chiefs believe they can significantly damage Hamas' remaining capabilities in that time, paving the way for a shift to a lower-intensity phase of targeted airstrikes and special forces operations, according to the two Israeli and two regional officials who asked to remain anonymous to speak freely."
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/israel-s-six-week-drive-to-hit-hamas-in-rafah-and-scale-back-war/ar-BB1iuZ3J?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=2dff0224a0194f109a56af100a89ac71&ei=17
I have had a couple of dreams that have changed my life. One in particular. Freud was right: they are far from meaningless, they can be really important
indeed, here is an example
I have a female relative who had a recurring and deeply unpleasant dream of mice nesting in her left breast. It was horrible and it came in various permutations but basically always the same theme: mice, nesting in her breast
She felt physically fine, in her 40s, but in the end she went to the doc and: Yes, he found a small troubling lump, and she went to the oncologist: it was cancer in her left breast, but they'd caught it very early - thanks to that dream
This would
1) Compensate the Post Masters
2) Punish the managers
3) Convert the SPMs into Evul Rich Imperialists, so we don’t have to feel sorry for them anymore.
What’s not to like?
Hmmm…. Phone number for the Libyan Coastguard, anyone?
1) utter blithering incompetence in an interview, to end up throwing a beloved colleague under a bus
2) being part of a government where colleagues from the other (the head banging wing) of the party are doing things that actually disgust you (not in my name, not my politics) so you accidentally on purpose end up throwing that colleague under a bus.
And then they would leave, many $$$ to the good.
Some men I think update their style really well as they age. Out go the combats or jeans and the trainers and in come classic but stylish boots, Loake or something, and well cut trousers, nice shirts and maybe even a cheeky waistcoat. Often accompanied with a beard. If still slim, perhaps a nice suit. And I kind of admire that approach. It's prevalent in the pricier bars in Leeds. Richard Hawley always dresses well, for example. But sadly I don't think it's for me. That would get me some stick down the local. If I can get away with wearing crocs 95% of the time you can imagine how often I would fit in wearing clobber like that.
And then, when she was about six, she managed - in her dream - to do some sort of deal with them; I think she challenged the gazelle to a running race, and if she won, the gazelle would agree not to bother her again. She won (though she may have cheated), and has slept well ever since.
ISTR there were some other details which made the whole thing odder still, but other people's dreams are even harder to remember than your own.
I don't know what to conclude from all this apart from that dreams are odd and so is my daughter.
I mean, what's not to like?
The ultimate form of this is "findoms", where domme women literally demand money from rich men, for all sorts of insane reasons, and the men hand it over, and get some masochistic pleasure from being cruelly exploited. Sometimes there is no physical or sexual interaction, the pleasure of being financially robbed and humiliated is enough for the man
I guess these are generally men who are super alpha, dominant and successful in life, perhaps quite ruthless (hence the money), who need something to balance it?
Same way cruel high court judges like to be spanked, and so on
1) the operation to free the hostages and crush Hamas has killed more hostages than freed, and can’t find the Hamas leadership (because they are not in Gaza, they’re in Turkey).
2) ceasefires that were freeing hostages have been torpedoed by a minority extremist grouping in Israel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH_MY8FJuYo
Have you read The Interpretation of Dreams?
It is remarkable how many people have not. It is a foundational text of modern civilisation, of human society, and it is ALSO brilliantly interesting and full of mad stories: it's properly fun to read
https://www.amazon.com/Interpretation-Dreams-Complete-Definitive-Text/dp/0465019773
I doubt that GK would go out of her way to stop KB being thrown under a bus. The incompetence is not being able to hide that.
But then again- if Badenoch has run out in front of the number 87A, what could a ministerial colleague say?