On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Johnson's 2008 was driven by the outer boroughs outvoting the core.
The demographics of London now makes it very hard for a Tory to win, IMHO.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Johnson's 2008 was driven by the outer boroughs outvoting the core.
The demographics of London now makes it very hard for a Tory to win, IMHO.
But Johnson would likely have lost to Livingstone in 2007 - ie before the popularity of the Labour government had plummeted.
Obviously they want someone even thicker than Useless, you could not make it up.
Tentatively agree with Malcs trenchant analysis. Incidentally, Jenny Gilruth is married to former Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale which just shows how love csn transcend politics.
Have visited Chester (Cheshire, England NOT Pennsylvania etc., etc.) and especially admired the "continuous half-timber galleries" by which I circumnavigated the old town.
However, saw no rows, donnybrooks, bruhahas, etc., etc. seemed like pretty peaceful burg; which is why I asked about "Rows of Chester" schedule . . .
It's a Victorian pastiche which is probably why it hasn't been listed. Chester's appeal is the continuous city walls and the Roman stuff, built on the XX Legion's camp, Northgate Street is the Via Decumana.
Of course gives its name to Westchester, "east" Chester being Chester-Le-Street in Co Durham
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
Does that apply both ways? The Common Travel Area is a big hole in the UK's immigration policy. And Irish immigrants to the UK are the least likely to call themselves British over time. If Irish people want to continue to benefit from joining British society, they should learn to integrate.
It would be quite funny and beautifully ironic if the Irish wanted to exit the CTA due to free movement causing excessive immigration for them.
It would be awfully sad, but the loser who comprises Aontú is moving towards that position, calling for an Irish Sea border (by which I think he means passport checks between GB and NI).
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
I'm in a very flat, and quite dull scenery wise, period of the Camino, so I'm trying to get loads done each day
I've got to a village called Bercianos del Real Camino. I got a room for 25€. The room has a lock but I don't have a key, and I have to share a bathroom
I've found a little bar/restaurant and am now eating calamari and chips with quite a nice local red
Red wine with fish - are you a Russian assassin?
Maybe, but I also really like the Bierza reds
And squid isn't a fish
I can get calamari and chips from the chip shop up the road via Deliveroo. No walking needed, and certainly not 45km a day.
If it's Spain it's calamares not calamari, and they don't care what colour your cold wine is.
I very much doubt that this year's Local Elections will be anything like as disastrous for the Tories as the May 1968 elections were for Harold Wilson's Labour government. That year almost every London Borough was won by the Tories including Hackney, Islington and Lambeth. Nationally the Tories enjoyed control of all the major cities - Birmingham - Liverpool - Manchester - Leeds - Sheffield - Newcastle upon Tyne - Norwich - Coventry - Bradford
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody else's hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Johnson's 2008 was driven by the outer boroughs outvoting the core.
The demographics of London now makes it very hard for a Tory to win, IMHO.
The Tories likely won't ever win London at a GE again (in 2019 it had the highest Labour voteshare of any UK region) and even Cameron lost London overall in 2010 and 2015 despite Boris winning the mayoralty in 2008 and 2012.
So charismatic Conservatives like Boris can occasionally win the Mayoralty if the incumbent and a Labour government are unpopular but the Tories will never win it again at a national level unless an absolute Tory landslide of 1983 proportions
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody elses hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
I am reminded of CS Lewis' dry comment on sales and readership when congratulated on sales of The Screwtape Letters:
'If you equated the number of Bibles read in England with the number of Bibles sold in England you would be far astray.'
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
Mary, Queen of Scots, would surprise on the upside
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody else's hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
Mary, Queen of Scots, would surprise on the upside
Her policy may have been popular, but she was hampered by the execution.
Does that apply both ways? The Common Travel Area is a big hole in the UK's immigration policy. And Irish immigrants to the UK are the least likely to call themselves British over time. If Irish people want to continue to benefit from joining British society, they should learn to integrate.
It would be quite funny and beautifully ironic if the Irish wanted to exit the CTA due to free movement causing excessive immigration for them.
It would be awfully sad, but the loser who comprises Aontú is moving towards that position, calling for an Irish Sea border (by which I think he means passport checks between GB and NI).
Yup. There is a strong hint that what the Irish want is full security checks re-instituted on the ferries to NI from the mainland.
The undocumented are not travelling by air (too much checking as part of airport security theatre). Which leave the ferries. Back in the Fun Times, there were document checks for passengers.
Obviously they want someone even thicker than Useless, you could not make it up.
Tentatively agree with Malcs trenchant analysis. Incidentally, Jenny Gilruth is married to former Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale which just shows how love csn transcend politics.
I think love survives between political opponents in the UK . There would be zip chance of that in the USA given how polarized things have become .
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Given the change in fortunes they saw the Tories win previously rock-solid safe Labour seats like Sedgefield, I am sure that there's a possible future where the Tories win London again.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
Indeed - formerly there had been two seats - Walthamstow East and Walthamstow West in addition to the Leyton seat..
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
And, bias aside, Winchester College as the first example of the public schools that have made everyone’s lives better by producing luminaries such as Rishi, Boris, Dave etc. it has more listed buildings than Manchester so deserves it for being a living museum of educational, religious and secular architecture since the1380s.
And the Isle of Man for being a living museum of the 1950s.
Only Rishi went to Winchester, Boris and Dave went to Eton.
Indeed former Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell and Gladstone's Chancellor Robert Lowe went to Winchester so it has produced as many top Labour and Liberal politicians as Tories
They should ban Public Schoolboy twats from ever being PM.
No Attlee, Churchill, Macmillan, Blair, Cameron or Gladstone or Boris or Sunak in that case
My Grammar School produced Peter Bone. I don’t think you can draw conclusions from a few individuals. After all, if I’d got into Parliament………..
The next general election will also be the first general election all 3 UK main party leaders went to public school since 1959. Sunak to Winchester, Davey to Nottingham High School and Starmer to Reigate Grammar School, which was an independent public school by the time he reached the 6th form even if a state grammar school when he entered it.
Truss being our first PM fully educated at a comprehensive for secondary education was denied the chance to ensure a state school educated leader amongst the 3 when replaced by Sunak
PB pedantry- the latter two schools are “Private Schools” not “Public Schools”. I’m deeply disappointed in you for not knowing the difference. Double detention for HYUFD.
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
If they elect Jenny Gilruth that may well be the result. She really should be called Jenny McTruss.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
Indeed - formerly there had been two seats - Walthamstow East and Walthamstow West in addition to the Leyton seat..
Chingford is/was another Waltham Forest seat, although parts of its modern incarnation fall outside the borough I believe.
Does that apply both ways? The Common Travel Area is a big hole in the UK's immigration policy. And Irish immigrants to the UK are the least likely to call themselves British over time. If Irish people want to continue to benefit from joining British society, they should learn to integrate.
It would be quite funny and beautifully ironic if the Irish wanted to exit the CTA due to free movement causing excessive immigration for them.
It would be awfully sad, but the loser who comprises Aontú is moving towards that position, calling for an Irish Sea border (by which I think he means passport checks between GB and NI).
Yup. There is a strong hint that what the Irish want is full security checks re-instituted on the ferries to NI from the mainland.
The undocumented are not travelling by air (too much checking as part of airport security theatre). Which leave the ferries. Back in the Fun Times, there were document checks for passengers.
As I understand it there are full document checks for foot and coach travellers on the Wales - Republic of Ireland ferry routes. I'm guessing asylum seekers in Britain are less likely to have their own car.
This could become fascinating. The RoI sounds like it will expect the UK to behave (ie have Ireland's migrants returned to UK) exactly as France does not behave in relation to to UK.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
Mary, Queen of Scots, would surprise on the upside
Elizabeth, Queen of Scots would surprise full stop. The BDSM Queen.
Most of those convicted have something in common. Apart from being evil, that is.
These criminal cases with the same common profile continue to crop up every few weeks. And yet politicians won't talk about it because they are cowards.
This could become fascinating. The RoI sounds like it will expect the UK to behave (ie have Ireland's migrants returned to UK) exactly as France does not behave in relation to to UK.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
In recent years I believe Ireland has taken in even more migrants per head than the UK, so not surprising they're not happy about the current situation.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
Indeed - formerly there had been two seats - Walthamstow East and Walthamstow West in addition to the Leyton seat..
Chingford is/was another Waltham Forest seat, although parts of its modern incarnation fall outside the borough I believe.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
Have visited Chester (Cheshire, England NOT Pennsylvania etc., etc.) and especially admired the "continuous half-timber galleries" by which I circumnavigated the old town.
However, saw no rows, donnybrooks, bruhahas, etc., etc. seemed like pretty peaceful burg; which is why I asked about "Rows of Chester" schedule . . .
It's a Victorian pastiche which is probably why it hasn't been listed. Chester's appeal is the continuous city walls and the Roman stuff, built on the XX Legion's camp, Northgate Street is the Via Decumana.
Of course gives its name to Westchester, "east" Chester being Chester-Le-Street in Co Durham
The most famous bits of carcassonne - the witches’ hats - are also Victorian pastiche (le duc) and the town is UNESCO listed
I'm in a very flat, and quite dull scenery wise, period of the Camino, so I'm trying to get loads done each day
I've got to a village called Bercianos del Real Camino. I got a room for 25€. The room has a lock but I don't have a key, and I have to share a bathroom
I've found a little bar/restaurant and am now eating calamari and chips with quite a nice local red
Red wine with fish - are you a Russian assassin?
Maybe, but I also really like the Bierza reds
And squid isn't a fish
Pedantically "fish" is not a true clade so it's problematic saying things do or don't count as fish. Shellfish can quite justifiably complain that they could call us landfish because we are so much more closely related to herrings than to mussels.
This could become fascinating. The RoI sounds like it will expect the UK to behave (ie have Ireland's migrants returned to UK) exactly as France does not behave in relation to to UK.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
It’s gestural from Ireland. There’s no way they can return migrants from the EU to the UK without the EU reciprocating - allowing the UK to return the boat people to France. Not going to happen
I don’t think Humza Yousaf will make it to the vote of no confidence on Wednesday. He will resign before that as he cannot accept support from Alba and the Greens have made clear they won’t back him.
It’s over.
Richi should take the hint...
If he resigns, we're looking at new elections, surely. The SNP can't get a new leader in within 28 days. Is there a figure they could put forward whom Regan or the Greens would vote in as a caretaker?
Its time...for Ross Greer.
Don't be silly.
There is only one person with the wisdom, the brilliance, the determination and the skill to ride this storm out.
It is time for...TRUSS.
(That was just to save @Anabobazina the effort, by the way.)
It a testament to your notably unorthodox, imaginative thinking that you raise the deliciously challenging prospect of TRUSS ascending to Bute House, to become premier of the Scottish realm.
And why not? TRUSS is a leader for ALL, and the Scots are no exception. Westminster’s loss will be Holyrood’s gain, an impressive idea whose time has come.
McTRUSS
The quickest way to kill off Scottish independence talk for ever would be Truss as FM of Scotland
If they elect Jenny Gilruth that may well be the result. She really should be called Jenny McTruss.
Great to hear the thoughts on this matter of the sharp minds that supported Johnston, Rishi and Douglas Ross. Or Murray Ross as BJ called him.
"Also in the campaign period at least 1 flight will take off for Rwanda, perhaps more with one on eve of polling. ....... The Rwanda flights will return Ref voters back to the Conservatives. You can say recent polling on Rwanda doesn’t suggest the Rwanda flights will generate a stampede of Ref back to Con, and I will laugh at you because that hypothetical polling is a poor predictive measure for how humans radically change their views once elections are called and Rwanda flights are happening."
I can see the headline: 50 Flown to Rwanda, 500 more come over the Channel
Things have changed on this. Now the Rwanda plan is in place, the fact Rwanda policy might work - and absolutely no one is offering an alternative plan - is now neutralising the problems the Tory’s could have had with this summers rise in boat crossings. News of boat crossings have become meaningless set against the potential success of Rwanda plan that’s now in place.
The fact Labour has pledged to throw away the money and time and effort spent on getting the policy here, scrap the scheme so we will never know if it could work as deterrent or not, is actually a vote winner for Sunak and the Conservatives. Can you not appreciate how perceptions of this have shifted on this over recent month’s - Rwanda Plan is now helping Tories get voters back from Reform, and the threat of cancelling it is costing Labour. Because in the minds of voters there is only one plan on the table, it might work, but it definitely won’t work under Labour because they will scrap the scheme, taking us back to the starting point with no plan in the table.
The key point here isn’t can it work, but is potential it might work that’s in the minds of voters when they vote in the General Election, because voters won’t believe Labour actually have a plan when they vote. The only party who have put a plan to stop the boats on the table is the Conservatives, Labour have pledged to scrap this before it might work. Labour have chosen to create this clear policy difference, and Labour have been very very stupid. Given clear choice between no plan, and bonkers plan that might just work, it’s obvious to all which option voters will always choose.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
Indeed - formerly there had been two seats - Walthamstow East and Walthamstow West in addition to the Leyton seat..
Chingford is/was another Waltham Forest seat, although parts of its modern incarnation fall outside the borough I believe.
Woodford Green is in Redbridge
Some bits are, some slivers of it are in Waltham Forest
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Btw that was written by the notoriously unfaithful, non-uxorious, serially philandering and probably bisexual Shakespeare. Who abandoned his family for london and then ended up giving his wife his second best bed
This could become fascinating. The RoI sounds like it will expect the UK to behave (ie have Ireland's migrants returned to UK) exactly as France does not behave in relation to to UK.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
The UK should debate this directly with the EU. None of this France or Ireland responsibility splitting. They don't have sovereignty here, given they are now effectively provinces of a sovereign power. Every time Ireland bitches about it, just say "Yes, we are trying to discuss it with your masters in Brussels but they are stonewalling. Take it up with them. Vote the bastards out if you're unhappy... oh wait, you can't."
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
There is an essential contradiction built into the evolution of the species; for reasons that hardly need exploring there are evolutionary reasons for blokes potentially fancying anything in skirt of child bearing age. This does not only apply to Leon. For similarly obvious reasons there is a solid case for very long term bonding, and therefore ageing together, especially in relation to child rearing (which takes decades) and long term stability. (We all get old too).
There is also a strong 'numerical' case for a normative state of 'one partner each' and not nine, ten or whatever. This government would call it part of the levelling up strategy. It gives the poor, the ugly and the introvert a stake in the great game. There aren't enough Scarlett Johanssons to go round.
I would suggest that it isn't particularly wise to 'blame' men for not being attractive to women and being unable to find a partner. Not all are 'incels'; many are perhaps just shy or confused.
Men going in to the workplace encounter a lot of processes which appear to be about promoting women to try and address disparities at senior level where older men still monopolise roles. It is these same men that promote these processes as a way of expressing their 'allyship' towards women. But what appears to happen in practice is that younger women get prioritised for recruitment and promotions at a lower level, which then leads to resentment amongst men. I have observed this myself and felt this frustration. In the long run though, I think that merit still triumphs, and men still have a large number of inherent advantages which perhaps aren't that obvious when you are in your 20's.
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
And, bias aside, Winchester College as the first example of the public schools that have made everyone’s lives better by producing luminaries such as Rishi, Boris, Dave etc. it has more listed buildings than Manchester so deserves it for being a living museum of educational, religious and secular architecture since the1380s.
And the Isle of Man for being a living museum of the 1950s.
Only Rishi went to Winchester, Boris and Dave went to Eton.
Indeed former Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell and Gladstone's Chancellor Robert Lowe went to Winchester so it has produced as many top Labour and Liberal politicians as Tories
They should ban Public Schoolboy twats from ever being PM.
No Attlee, Churchill, Macmillan, Blair, Cameron or Gladstone or Boris or Sunak in that case
My Grammar School produced Peter Bone. I don’t think you can draw conclusions from a few individuals. After all, if I’d got into Parliament………..
The next general election will also be the first general election all 3 UK main party leaders went to public school since 1959. Sunak to Winchester, Davey to Nottingham High School and Starmer to Reigate Grammar School, which was an independent public school by the time he reached the 6th form even if a state grammar school when he entered it.
Truss being our first PM fully educated at a comprehensive for secondary education was denied the chance to ensure a state school educated leader amongst the 3 when replaced by Sunak
PB pedantry- the latter two schools are “Private Schools” not “Public Schools”. I’m deeply disappointed in you for not knowing the difference. Double detention for HYUFD.
Entirely unrelated to anything at all, just thought I'd share this charming little oddity (no pun intended!) that youtube threw my way. David Bowie and Marianne Faithfull doing a live cover of "I got you, babe".
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
On topic, I think when people vote for mayors they want interesting personalities. That would seem to explain Livingstone winning as an independent, Boris winning in a Labour city, Burnham winning Manchester (though probably any Labour politician would win that one), Street in Birmingham and even Houchen in Teesside outperforming polls. Khan, seemingly the exception to this rule, has been blessed with two hopeless opponents, and likely a third.
London does not always vote Labour. The GLC was Tory- held 1967 - 1973 and again 1977 - 1981 when Labour only won narrowly. The last Tory GLC leader was Horace Cutler. As late as 1987 the Tories had a very good GE in London when they won Waltham Forest and Battersea - both having stayed Labour in 1983. Johnson's 2008 win was nothing like as exceptional as many like to suggest - particularly in the context of an unpopular Labour government nationally. The 2008 Mayoral election took place in the same month the Tories captured Crewe & Nantwich at the by election which followed the death of Gwynneth Dunwoody.
Waltham Forest is a London Borough, not a parliamentary seat, and never has been one. The Tories did win Walthamstow in 1987, which is what I assume you mean. Seems remarkable now: Stella Creasy sits on a majority there of 31,000.
Indeed - formerly there had been two seats - Walthamstow East and Walthamstow West in addition to the Leyton seat..
Chingford is/was another Waltham Forest seat, although parts of its modern incarnation fall outside the borough I believe.
Woodford Green is in Redbridge
Some bits are, some slivers of it are in Waltham Forest
Woodford Green is in Redbridge, Chingford is in Waltham Forest.
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I've always been attracted to older women, even as I've got older. Which admittedly does eventually lead you down the "Why there! Lovely mobility scooter you've got there!".
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Btw that was written by the notoriously unfaithful, non-uxorious, serially philandering and probably bisexual Shakespeare. Who abandoned his family for london and then ended up giving his wife his second best bed
Donne elegy IX is more in point
No spring nor summer beauty hath such grace As I have seen in one autumnal face. Young beauties force our love, and that's a rape, This doth but counsel, yet you cannot scape.
I am in the happy position that my target age rises in sync with my own. Exhausting at the age of 60 pursuing 25 year olds.
Thames Water collapse could trigger Truss-style borrowing crisis, Whitehall officials fear
Exclusive: Concerns over effect on UK’s finances lead officials to believe utility should be renationalised before general election
Senior Whitehall officials fear Thames Water’s financial collapse could trigger a rise in government borrowing costs not seen since the chaos of the Liz Truss mini-budget, the Guardian can reveal.
Such is their concern about the impact on wider borrowing costs for the UK, even beyond utilities and infrastructure, that they believe Thames should be renationalised before the general election.
Officials in the Treasury and the UK’s Debt Management Office fear that, unless the UK’s biggest water company is renationalised as soon as possible, “prolonged uncertainty” about its fate could “damage confidence in UK plc at a sensitive time”, with elections in the UK and the US later this year.
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
And, bias aside, Winchester College as the first example of the public schools that have made everyone’s lives better by producing luminaries such as Rishi, Boris, Dave etc. it has more listed buildings than Manchester so deserves it for being a living museum of educational, religious and secular architecture since the1380s.
And the Isle of Man for being a living museum of the 1950s.
Only Rishi went to Winchester, Boris and Dave went to Eton.
Indeed former Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell and Gladstone's Chancellor Robert Lowe went to Winchester so it has produced as many top Labour and Liberal politicians as Tories
They should ban Public Schoolboy twats from ever being PM.
No Attlee, Churchill, Macmillan, Blair, Cameron or Gladstone or Boris or Sunak in that case
My Grammar School produced Peter Bone. I don’t think you can draw conclusions from a few individuals. After all, if I’d got into Parliament………..
The next general election will also be the first general election all 3 UK main party leaders went to public school since 1959. Sunak to Winchester, Davey to Nottingham High School and Starmer to Reigate Grammar School, which was an independent public school by the time he reached the 6th form even if a state grammar school when he entered it.
Truss being our first PM fully educated at a comprehensive for secondary education was denied the chance to ensure a state school educated leader amongst the 3 when replaced by Sunak
PB pedantry- the latter two schools are “Private Schools” not “Public Schools”. I’m deeply disappointed in you for not knowing the difference. Double detention for HYUFD.
Does buying a Manor House and its title make you upper class? I thought you of all people would understand the importance of hierarchy.
You know there are only really seven.
I'd say it does, in surprisingly short order - though I'm not sure if one can buy a recognised title. You children, second generation, would be regarded as a bit nouveau riche, and their kids would be fine.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Btw that was written by the notoriously unfaithful, non-uxorious, serially philandering and probably bisexual Shakespeare. Who abandoned his family for london and then ended up giving his wife his second best bed
Your knowledge is often so superficial. At the time the best bed would have been reserved for visiting guests, and so the second best bed would have been the marital bed, i.e. the one she slept in.
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
With each other anyway.
If they are sexually active on occasion it tends to be with their spouse or partner.
'According to the National Poll on Healthy Aging, 40% of people between the ages of 65 and 80 are sexually active. Of these folks, 73% say they are satisfied with their sex lives. Among the people with spouses or partners, 54% said they were sexually active' https://www.verywellhealth.com/sex-after-sixty-2966815
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
There is an essential contradiction built into the evolution of the species; for reasons that hardly need exploring there are evolutionary reasons for blokes potentially fancying anything in skirt of child bearing age. This does not only apply to Leon. For similarly obvious reasons there is a solid case for very long term bonding, and therefore ageing together, especially in relation to child rearing (which takes decades) and long term stability. (We all get old too).
There is also a strong 'numerical' case for a normative state of 'one partner each' and not nine, ten or whatever. This government would call it part of the levelling up strategy. It gives the poor, the ugly and the introvert a stake in the great game. There aren't enough Scarlett Johanssons to go round.
There is a strange paradox at work here. Humans, biologically, are a polygynous species. Every biological marker of dimorphism - not least the fact that human males are larger, more aggressive etc - points to that fact. I believe in human history, even after the start of society 10,000 years ago, about a third of males never reproduced.
Indeed that might be a fun game for a Sunday evening
Ten places in the UK that should be UNESCO listed but aren’t because we’re a bit crap at selling ourselves (and bribing UNESCO)
Kilpeck church & the churches of SW Herefordshire Tintern Abbey The Victorian heart of Manchester Oxford Cambridge The guildhalls of the City of London The Wren churches of the City of London Victorian Glasgow Porchester The ensemble of Winchester cathedral and the walk to Holy Cross
I'm surprised you left out this one:
Mine's bigger than yours!
I don't think this conversation has led bury far.
To be honest, I can't claim that one to be mine. This is mine, so yours is more impressive.
Thames Water collapse could trigger Truss-style borrowing crisis, Whitehall officials fear
Exclusive: Concerns over effect on UK’s finances lead officials to believe utility should be renationalised before general election
Senior Whitehall officials fear Thames Water’s financial collapse could trigger a rise in government borrowing costs not seen since the chaos of the Liz Truss mini-budget, the Guardian can reveal.
Such is their concern about the impact on wider borrowing costs for the UK, even beyond utilities and infrastructure, that they believe Thames should be renationalised before the general election.
Officials in the Treasury and the UK’s Debt Management Office fear that, unless the UK’s biggest water company is renationalised as soon as possible, “prolonged uncertainty” about its fate could “damage confidence in UK plc at a sensitive time”, with elections in the UK and the US later this year.
This must absolutely, categorically be resisted. Fuck them. Fuck the greedy shareholders now expecting the taxpayer to bail them out; Fuck the Treasury; Fuck the Debt Management Office. This crappy business going bust is the best thing that can happen to the UK economy.
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody else's hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
Take the case of Mark Dawson, a British writer who just over a week ago hit No 8 on the Sunday Times hardback list with his thriller The Cleaner, released by the independent publisher Welbeck at the end of June. This is a great achievement for any author or small publishing house, but Dawson had done something remarkable: he bought 400 copies of his own book, at a cost of £3,600, to push his sales high enough to make the top 10.
By my count (and not suggesting there's anything nefarious going on) she's still very far behind "The Complete Air Fryer Cookbook".
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Btw that was written by the notoriously unfaithful, non-uxorious, serially philandering and probably bisexual Shakespeare. Who abandoned his family for london and then ended up giving his wife his second best bed
Donne elegy IX is more in point
No spring nor summer beauty hath such grace As I have seen in one autumnal face. Young beauties force our love, and that's a rape, This doth but counsel, yet you cannot scape.
I am in the happy position that my target age rises in sync with my own. Exhausting at the age of 60 pursuing 25 year olds.
It is. Exhausting. I’m not asking for sympathy but merely explaining my position
No marital or amatory status is intrinsically superior to another. For some men bedding 100 women and leading the life of a wastrel is what they’re made for, then other people have six partners and settle for the seventh and all is good
Both can be happy, we shouldn’t judge either. The ideal is not to hurt other people unduly. A certain amount of hurting is inevitable - there will always be broken hearts. But you don’t have to actively betray
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
There is an essential contradiction built into the evolution of the species; for reasons that hardly need exploring there are evolutionary reasons for blokes potentially fancying anything in skirt of child bearing age. This does not only apply to Leon. For similarly obvious reasons there is a solid case for very long term bonding, and therefore ageing together, especially in relation to child rearing (which takes decades) and long term stability. (We all get old too).
There is also a strong 'numerical' case for a normative state of 'one partner each' and not nine, ten or whatever. This government would call it part of the levelling up strategy. It gives the poor, the ugly and the introvert a stake in the great game. There aren't enough Scarlett Johanssons to go round.
There is a strange paradox at work here. Humans, biologically, are a polygynous species. Every biological marker of dimorphism - not least the fact that human males are larger, more aggressive etc - points to that fact. I believe in human history, even after the start of society 10,000 years ago, about a third of males never reproduced.
I presume you mean adult males ? Otherwise with the very high infant mortality for nearly all of those years it seems on the possible low side
Have visited Chester (Cheshire, England NOT Pennsylvania etc., etc.) and especially admired the "continuous half-timber galleries" by which I circumnavigated the old town.
However, saw no rows, donnybrooks, bruhahas, etc., etc. seemed like pretty peaceful burg; which is why I asked about "Rows of Chester" schedule . . .
It's a Victorian pastiche which is probably why it hasn't been listed. Chester's appeal is the continuous city walls and the Roman stuff, built on the XX Legion's camp, Northgate Street is the Via Decumana.
Of course gives its name to Westchester, "east" Chester being Chester-Le-Street in Co Durham
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I've always been attracted to older women, even as I've got older. Which admittedly does eventually lead you down the "Why there! Lovely mobility scooter you've got there!".
My two longest running relationships including my eventual wife were both older than me, by 5 and 2 years. Not sure that was a deliberate decision though, just happens.
My thoughts on the male involuntary celibacy thing: alpha types are fine regardless of whether they are dinosaur throwbacks or ultra-woke new men. Indeed fully fledged champions of toxic masculinity will do fine if they have confidence and good looks. Or even just confidence despite being objectively odd looking. I remember seeing Laurence Fox in a pub in the Cotswolds with a rather beautiful girlfriend a couple of years ago as proof of the theory.
Among the nerdier, more awkward cohort it’s much more discriminatory. A reliable, nice nerd with some semblance of empathy and a decent job will eventually get the girl. A frustrated incel with dinosaur views and too many hours per day on the internet won’t.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
I think most men have a preference for youth. But - assuming you're psychologically stable - if you are in healthy love with someone, that attraction overwhelms the youth preference, even for sexual attraction. Getting to explore and pleasure the body of the person you think is most fantastic in the world is just an all time high, every time. So at that point all the imperfections of age become markers of that person and just contribute to knowing it's them.
Anyway, that is a separate discussion to my original point. Which is that one high quality woman, sticking with you and commiting their life to you for decade after decade, is more impressive than a large number of women experimenting with you for one night.
Because I have known Mrs Foxy since we were in our early twenties, she remains 23 in my head, even though that is 35 years ago. I am reminded of Shakespeares Sonnet 116, which we had as one of our wedding readings:
Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments; love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come. Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom: If this be error and upon me proved, I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Btw that was written by the notoriously unfaithful, non-uxorious, serially philandering and probably bisexual Shakespeare. Who abandoned his family for london and then ended up giving his wife his second best bed
Yep. England's national Bard. His poetry and plays have aged well, because it taps into universal truths.
Thames Water collapse could trigger Truss-style borrowing crisis, Whitehall officials fear
Exclusive: Concerns over effect on UK’s finances lead officials to believe utility should be renationalised before general election
Senior Whitehall officials fear Thames Water’s financial collapse could trigger a rise in government borrowing costs not seen since the chaos of the Liz Truss mini-budget, the Guardian can reveal.
Such is their concern about the impact on wider borrowing costs for the UK, even beyond utilities and infrastructure, that they believe Thames should be renationalised before the general election.
Officials in the Treasury and the UK’s Debt Management Office fear that, unless the UK’s biggest water company is renationalised as soon as possible, “prolonged uncertainty” about its fate could “damage confidence in UK plc at a sensitive time”, with elections in the UK and the US later this year.
seems a bit OTT - Thames Water's debt is large but not that large. Even major shareholders like the universities pension scheme are chilled about it as a write off if necessary
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
When they do polls on this most men - worldwide - express a basic physical preference for women age 18-25 - the years of peak fertility. This is obviously true and to be expected. Indeed it would be weird if it wasn’t true. We’d die out as a species
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
Most of those convicted have something in common. Apart from being evil, that is.
Firstly they are men. And secondly, it’s the beards? (Right?). See above…
They all previously worked for The Met?
WTF is going on with the guy at the bottom in the middle? He looks like he died an hour before the picture was taken.
I have a really horrible feeling he's trying to do the 'old school' trick where people would flick their eyes while their 15 minute exposure was being taken down the nick in about 1920 so they were less recognisable.
This could become fascinating. The RoI sounds like it will expect the UK to behave (ie have Ireland's migrants returned to UK) exactly as France does not behave in relation to to UK.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
It’s gestural from Ireland. There’s no way they can return migrants from the EU to the UK without the EU reciprocating - allowing the UK to return the boat people to France. Not going to happen
If a coach travels from Dublin to Glasgow via Belfast, at what point do UK Border Force check whether the people on board have visas or passports?
Have visited Chester (Cheshire, England NOT Pennsylvania etc., etc.) and especially admired the "continuous half-timber galleries" by which I circumnavigated the old town.
However, saw no rows, donnybrooks, bruhahas, etc., etc. seemed like pretty peaceful burg; which is why I asked about "Rows of Chester" schedule . . .
It's a Victorian pastiche which is probably why it hasn't been listed. Chester's appeal is the continuous city walls and the Roman stuff, built on the XX Legion's camp, Northgate Street is the Via Decumana.
Of course gives its name to Westchester, "east" Chester being Chester-Le-Street in Co Durham
What is the ciurrent breakdown of Westminster parliamentary seats in the area of the Tees Valley mayoral election?
The area includes the councils: Darlington, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Stockton-on-Tees and Redcar & Cleveland.
This includes the current seats: Darlington (CON) Part of Sedgefield (CON) Hartlepool (CON) Stockton North (LAB) Stockton South (CON) Middleborough (LAB) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (CON) Redcar (CON)
So, five and a bit to two in the Conservative's favour.
Is this the list of missed out UNESCO World Heritage Sites.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
When they do polls on this most men - worldwide - express a basic physical preference for women age 18-25 - the years of peak fertility. This is obviously true and to be expected. Indeed it would be weird if it wasn’t true. We’d die out as a species
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
as men age , the sexual attraction of youthful women may remain but the baggage that goes with it becomes more and more unattractive - the sex may be good but you will pay for it (young are poor) financially and start to dread 'going out' as it will be to a club where you have no idea of the music or slang or trends etc - Leon as a cultured man ,would find it difficult to hold a good intelligent conversation with a 20 year old who would be naturally self centred and ignorant of the world
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
When they do polls on this most men - worldwide - express a basic physical preference for women age 18-25 - the years of peak fertility. This is obviously true and to be expected. Indeed it would be weird if it wasn’t true. We’d die out as a species
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
We are more than physical beings though.
I am not anticipating needing to, but I don't think I could sustain a relationship with someone not of a similar age. There is a need for a common hinterland. Someone who remembers life before cellphones.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May.The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May.
There is only one political party who can be seen to lose this election from here, so it will be a very difficult campaign for Labour, obvious jitters with polls tightening once election called. 9th May BOE interest rate cut announced, 10th May UK comes out of recession with good first quarter growth, 22nd May Inflation will fall below 2% - no arguing or doubt about this because its based on energy prices. Also in the campaign period at least 1 flight will take off for Rwanda, perhaps more with one on eve of polling. The sunny economic news will contrast with the depth of credit crisis in voters minds and credit given to Rishi and Hunt for the financial turnaround pulls rug from under Labours best argument for voters to switch to them. The Rwanda flights will return Ref voters back to the Conservatives. You can say recent polling on Rwanda doesn’t suggest the Rwanda flights will generate a stampede of Ref back to Con, and I will laugh at you because that hypothetical polling is a poor predictive measure for how humans radically change their views once elections are called and Rwanda flights are happening.
I can give you the July election result right now, in shares and seats.
CON33 LAB39 LDM16 REF3 GRN4 SNP2
CON180 LAB379 LDM48 REF0 GRN1 (Bristols not Brightons) SNP21 PLD4
Consider this my entry in the inevitable PB competition when it comes.
Good morning.
Top notch spoof, unless you are actually being serious. The Conservatives will not be trusted to run the economy again for a very long time.
John Major polled 30.7% in 1997 and there is no way this time they are going to get that high. Sub 30 looks odds on, evidenced by the ongoing slump in their opinion poll ratings. They are currently polling 6-9% below the 1997 figures for the commensurate period. That’s the maths of it.
The only part of your post which has possibility of traction is the July election. An intriguing idea. Unlikely, but not impossible.
all comparisons with 1997 are meaningless - the electorate is a different beast, the electorate of 1997 would never have voted for Brexit. The electorate in 2024 are more right wing and eurosceptic than 1997. polls are not predicting a Labour victory. Polls never predict. Pollsters are not future tellers. elections throw up unexpected results, voters succumb to campaigns and messaging. Guessing this is how money can be made from Political betting. you are wrong to think because an argument is the right its the way voters will vote, if a policy or piece of spin is ludicrous you assume voters won’t vote for it. You are wrong.
Analysis of the current polling - a double digit lead not based on Labour 10+% ahead of the Conservatives. You should see it in Brexit Britain, 2024, Starmer’s just a handful of points ahead of the centre right bloc. It’s not a big Labour lead, it’s a Tory polling struggle reform, a double digit RFM total added to CON is 36% just handful of points behind Labour. These voters are Tories in the last 3 General elections - will all those voters vowing to throw their vote away on Reform go through with it in actual 2 party type FPTP General Election? I don’t think so. The Conservatives don’t need to convince lots of voters for a stunning comeback, they don’t need 75% of the electorate to change its mind between now and voting day, just that 9% threatening to throw their vote away on Reform to have second thoughts. Labour have certainly proved they can’t convince that 9% to vote for them, because that 9% and the Tories are of the same mindset the same bloc of post Brexit vote.
It’s either the most votes ever thrown away by voters in a general election, or potential is there for this election to explode the polling stalemate and the presumed result blown apart in the last weeks of the coming campaign. So I am being serious. This is a very serious way to look at it.
I’m not ramping July 4th only to later say Sunak has bottled it - i genuinely believe with inflation under 2%, interest rate cut announced, economy out of recession and growing, promise of Rwanda deterrent working, optimism gives Tories a far better result on July 4th than mixed picture and less optimism in November or December.
I am 100% convinced Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May. The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May. And the right wing pro Brexit block of 37% will come together before election day.
Entirely unrelated to anything at all, just thought I'd share this charming little oddity (no pun intended!) that youtube threw my way. David Bowie and Marianne Faithfull doing a live cover of "I got you, babe".
I would suggest that it isn't particularly wise to 'blame' men for not being attractive to women and being unable to find a partner. Not all are 'incels'; many are perhaps just shy or confused.
Men going in to the workplace encounter a lot of processes which appear to be about promoting women to try and address disparities at senior level where older men still monopolise roles. It is these same men that promote these processes as a way of expressing their 'allyship' towards women. But what appears to happen in practice is that younger women get prioritised for recruitment and promotions at a lower level, which then leads to resentment amongst men. I have observed this myself and felt this frustration. In the long run though, I think that merit still triumphs, and men still have a large number of inherent advantages which perhaps aren't that obvious when you are in your 20's.
Yes, I think that's right. I’ve observed the same.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
When they do polls on this most men - worldwide - express a basic physical preference for women age 18-25 - the years of peak fertility. This is obviously true and to be expected. Indeed it would be weird if it wasn’t true. We’d die out as a species
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
I'd be interested as to how the poll was conducted:
- If it was based on showing photos of various beautiful women at different ages, or course most people choose those in their prime from a traditional standpoint.
- If you were surveyed men as to who they secretly fancy on a personal basis and would hypothetically like to take out on a date, assuming all ties and commitments did not exist, my bet is it would skew far more towards the age of the respondent.
Which is my point: in real life, for a very significant proportion of men, attraction is a result of a far more complex set of inputs than who they'd put up on their wall as a teenager.
I recognise that many men also never grow out of their preference for 18-25 year olds, and that's also fine. It was during those ages I was perrenially single and so made the most of dating my own age then, but it wouldn't be my preference now if had to return to the dating pool.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
I think you are being far too absolute in your views, even more so than Leon who is expressing his preference in women on a solely personal basis.
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
When they do polls on this most men - worldwide - express a basic physical preference for women age 18-25 - the years of peak fertility. This is obviously true and to be expected. Indeed it would be weird if it wasn’t true. We’d die out as a species
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
We are more than physical beings though.
I am not anticipating needing to, but I don't think I could sustain a relationship with someone not of a similar age. There is a need for a common hinterland. Someone who remembers life before cellphones.
My best ever relationship - my greatest love - was with someone 32 years younger than me. We only broke up because of differing desires re children (due to age). We never argued, we had amazing sex, we were very happy, we still miss each other
Crucially, we had an identical and highly evolved/insistent sense of humour. We constantly made each other laugh which is quite fundamental to getting on
True story. It can happen, it’s rare but it can happen. Love is where it falls
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
"Start fancying women your own age” is a misunderstanding. Men fancy women between, say, 20 - 30 years old . This doesn't change whether the man is 20, 40 or 60. It's hardly surprising when that age matches peak female fertility. The idea that men fancy older women as they themselves get older is absurd.
My wife is very intelligent, blonde, nubile, 5'2", with a great figure, beautiful face, a very healthy weight and a cracking set of tits. She also just happens to be 40. And she loves sex - and is always up for it.
Why wouldn't I fancy her?
I've seen women at work, and even been hit on by two of them, who were 23, 25 and 27 respectively and I've just thought.. nah. Not a great career move, first of all, and secondly my wife is hotter.
[It helps that I can forward project what they'd look like 10-15 years down the road, and they'd be no match.]
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody else's hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
Take the case of Mark Dawson, a British writer who just over a week ago hit No 8 on the Sunday Times hardback list with his thriller The Cleaner, released by the independent publisher Welbeck at the end of June. This is a great achievement for any author or small publishing house, but Dawson had done something remarkable: he bought 400 copies of his own book, at a cost of £3,600, to push his sales high enough to make the top 10.
By my count (and not suggesting there's anything nefarious going on) she's still very far behind "The Complete Air Fryer Cookbook".
So how long does it take to air-fry a head of lettuce?
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
That surely does vary a great deal! I am struck by how the Dating Game for young people has changed over time. Back in the 60s and 70s it was very normal for couples to be 'courting' or 'going steady' for months or indeed years before any physical intimacy took place. Sex was much more the end product very late on in the mating process - with many opting to remain virginal until marriage or betrothal. Nowadays when couples meet , they often end up cohabiting within two or three months which suggests physical intimacy occurs at much earlier stage of a relationship. It now tends to be assumed that if X or Y has a 'girlfriend' or 'boyfriend' that they are having sex - unless the people concerned are very religious. That was not the case in he 60s and 70s - in that some guys might have had several girlfriends over a period of five or six years without physical intimacy with any of them.
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
By 60 most married couples and partners rarely have sex anyway
With each other anyway.
If they are sexually active on occasion it tends to be with their spouse or partner.
'According to the National Poll on Healthy Aging, 40% of people between the ages of 65 and 80 are sexually active. Of these folks, 73% say they are satisfied with their sex lives. Among the people with spouses or partners, 54% said they were sexually active' https://www.verywellhealth.com/sex-after-sixty-2966815
My God, we need to get these people laid or the country itself will be screwed.
I have the solution. A massive government investment in pubs and discounted booze, and the internet to be switched off between 7pm and 5am.
It's not booze. There are few people as unattractive and frankly incapable as drunken twentysomethings, plus there are consent issues. I think there should be compulsory national courses for twentysomethings in washing, combing ones hair, getting a better haircut, shaving regularly, moisturising, showering, and going to the gym. Plus shaving those stupid f***ing beards off.
Both my boys have beards and lovely long term girlfriends. Neither has well paid jobs, but they are kind, good listeners do the cooking and housework and fun to be around. Neither is particularly classically good looking, though not ugly. Each met their girl via Hinge.
It's less marked in Britain, but in America there is a major difference between young men and young women over politics, and the divide is increasing:
Party politics is not everything, but increasingly it is about cultural and social issues rather than economic ones. These matter, so why would a young woman want to date a gun-toting anti-abortion climate change denier?. Their interests and aspirations are just too far apart, particularly for the College educated
So, it's not just a matter of brushing up on grooming, but also a brushing up of attitudes that's needed. This is an international phenomenon, with South Korea the most extreme example.
So the men all have to be left wing as well, to please the left wing women?
Why don’t the stupid left wing women veer right, to get the men?
Or have you considered the possibility that the politics ARISE from the way western society seems to favour women, hugely - and it does. And I speak as the father of two daughters. They massively benefit from structural sexism
You illustrate my point most excellently. Display those attitudes as a young man and don't expect to be dated. No one wants a whiney boyfriend complaining how life is so stacked in favour of girls.
Do you really want to compare numbers in terms of sexual conquests? Really? How can I put it politely: I don’t think you’re going to win
But let’s not go down that road eh
My point is, society is now structured towards women: women live longer, they get better grades in schools (as exams are changed to suit them), they now dominate the professions, they demand equality in every job yet somehow men still do all the shit physical jobs and they don’t demand equality there
And still men are legally discriminated against. Women only shortlists. Prizes for women. Jobs advertised for “minorities and women”. It’s obscene and absurd. And young men are starting to notice
I don't think comparing numbers is a good metric. I'm happy to concede a lower number, but in my humble opinion they were all stunners, non smokers, intelligent and no money ever changed hands.
Really? Your wife certainly charged me. But I don’t mind paying, TBF
Who on earth flagged this?? I am actually contributing useful advice for PB-ers, that if they meet @kjh’s charming wife DON’T EXPECT A FREE ONE
I am sure @kjh himself will happily back me up. He’s surely even keener than me to keep her income going
Why flag simple consumer advice that’s actually helpful??
*bewildered face*
Just so you know it wasn't me who flagged you. To be honest I would like to see the flag option taken away.. I didn't take offence. My wife might, but she won't see the post.
Regardless of the flagging dispute, having a high quality woman that will marry you - and stay married to you - is a far better marker of a real man that a hundred one night stands.
Is it? Who says?
I do. If you disagree, you can argue your reasons. And readers can determine for themselves who is more persuasive. That is the point of discussion.
Fair enough. I like a spirited debate - that’s why I’m here
My position is I love sex and I love women. Young women in particular. I genuinely tried gay sex - not for me
So it’s women and I physically prefer them under 30, that is the way I am made. I really really wish this was not the case - it’s a buyer’s market if you’re a sane male and straight and you fancy women over 45, but I don’t
Ergo if I’m to be sexually happy in a relationship I need a younger woman - this gets increasingly hard as I age (and increasingly ridiculous). There may come a time - soon - when I accept being celibate. Its not quite yet
If I were to marry someone she would have to accept that I won’t want to have sex with her after that age. That’s quite tough - cruel even. And then we’re both unhappy. Is that “better”? According to you it is
So do please explain how - with my make-up - I am meant to find a wife and settle down forever in marital bliss, as you define it, given the man I am
You play the hand you’re dealt. I have played and I still play the hand that god gave me. And I think that’s all you can do - and try not to hurt people
My wife is 40 years old, still hotter than many (most) 25 year olds and we still have great sex. You have to marry someone who's sexually compatible with you, always says yes, and who both really fancy each other.
Aren't you being a little silly?
I’m just being honest. Those are my tastes. This shit quite annoys me. I get it from my female feminist friends. “Just grow up Leon. Start fancying women your own age”
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
Well, I'm not the one that's tried gay sex.
Whatever floats your boat. Don't worry, you are still young, plenty of time yet to give it a spin.
Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May.The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May.
There is only one political party who can be seen to lose this election from here, so it will be a very difficult campaign for Labour, obvious jitters with polls tightening once election called. 9th May BOE interest rate cut announced, 10th May UK comes out of recession with good first quarter growth, 22nd May Inflation will fall below 2% - no arguing or doubt about this because its based on energy prices. Also in the campaign period at least 1 flight will take off for Rwanda, perhaps more with one on eve of polling. The sunny economic news will contrast with the depth of credit crisis in voters minds and credit given to Rishi and Hunt for the financial turnaround pulls rug from under Labours best argument for voters to switch to them. The Rwanda flights will return Ref voters back to the Conservatives. You can say recent polling on Rwanda doesn’t suggest the Rwanda flights will generate a stampede of Ref back to Con, and I will laugh at you because that hypothetical polling is a poor predictive measure for how humans radically change their views once elections are called and Rwanda flights are happening.
I can give you the July election result right now, in shares and seats.
CON33 LAB39 LDM16 REF3 GRN4 SNP2
CON180 LAB379 LDM48 REF0 GRN1 (Bristols not Brightons) SNP21 PLD4
Consider this my entry in the inevitable PB competition when it comes.
Good morning.
Top notch spoof, unless you are actually being serious. The Conservatives will not be trusted to run the economy again for a very long time.
John Major polled 30.7% in 1997 and there is no way this time they are going to get that high. Sub 30 looks odds on, evidenced by the ongoing slump in their opinion poll ratings. They are currently polling 6-9% below the 1997 figures for the commensurate period. That’s the maths of it.
The only part of your post which has possibility of traction is the July election. An intriguing idea. Unlikely, but not impossible.
all comparisons with 1997 are meaningless - the electorate is a different beast, the electorate of 1997 would never have voted for Brexit. The electorate in 2024 are more right wing and eurosceptic than 1997. polls are not predicting a Labour victory. Polls never predict. Pollsters are not future tellers. elections throw up unexpected results, voters succumb to campaigns and messaging. Guessing this is how money can be made from Political betting. you are wrong to think because an argument is the right its the way voters will vote, if a policy or piece of spin is ludicrous you assume voters won’t vote for it. You are wrong.
Analysis of the current polling - a double digit lead not based on Labour 10+% ahead of the Conservatives. You should see it in Brexit Britain, 2024, Starmer’s just a handful of points ahead of the centre right bloc. It’s not a big Labour lead, it’s a Tory polling struggle reform, a double digit RFM total added to CON is 36% just handful of points behind Labour. These voters are Tories in the last 3 General elections - will all those voters vowing to throw their vote away on Reform go through with it in actual 2 party type FPTP General Election? I don’t think so. The Conservatives don’t need to convince lots of voters for a stunning comeback, they don’t need 75% of the electorate to change its mind between now and voting day, just that 9% threatening to throw their vote away on Reform to have second thoughts. Labour have certainly proved they can’t convince that 9% to vote for them, because that 9% and the Tories are of the same mindset the same bloc of post Brexit vote.
It’s either the most votes ever thrown away by voters in a general election, or potential is there for this election to explode the polling stalemate and the presumed result blown apart in the last weeks of the coming campaign. So I am being serious. This is a very serious way to look at it.
I’m not ramping July 4th only to later say Sunak has bottled it - i genuinely believe with inflation under 2%, interest rate cut announced, economy out of recession and growing, promise of Rwanda deterrent working, optimism gives Tories a far better result on July 4th than mixed picture and less optimism in November or December.
I am 100% convinced Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May. The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May. And the right wing pro Brexit block of 37% will come together before election day.
I suspect the electorate is far less Thatcherite today than was the case in 1997 - much less likely to approve of privatisation and much more open minded about nationalisation and state intervention more generally. Returning Energy and the Water Industries to Public Control would now be well received. Even in 1997 the electorate was ready to see the Railways to State control - though Blair was too timid to take that step. Re- Thames Water - Why not let it go'bust' - and then renationalise for almost nothing? Ditto re-Royal Mail.
Thames Water collapse could trigger Truss-style borrowing crisis, Whitehall officials fear
Exclusive: Concerns over effect on UK’s finances lead officials to believe utility should be renationalised before general election
Senior Whitehall officials fear Thames Water’s financial collapse could trigger a rise in government borrowing costs not seen since the chaos of the Liz Truss mini-budget, the Guardian can reveal.
Such is their concern about the impact on wider borrowing costs for the UK, even beyond utilities and infrastructure, that they believe Thames should be renationalised before the general election.
Officials in the Treasury and the UK’s Debt Management Office fear that, unless the UK’s biggest water company is renationalised as soon as possible, “prolonged uncertainty” about its fate could “damage confidence in UK plc at a sensitive time”, with elections in the UK and the US later this year.
This must absolutely, categorically be resisted. Fuck them. Fuck the greedy shareholders now expecting the taxpayer to bail them out; Fuck the Treasury; Fuck the Debt Management Office. This crappy business going bust is the best thing that can happen to the UK economy.
Quite.
If the current management of Thames Water thinks the business is insolvent, they need to be calling the administrators, not lobbying the government for a bail out.
(That said, I think it is more likely the debt holders than the shareholders who are arguing for nationalisation. If it were nationalized it would be for £1. But if it was, the government would take on the entire liabilities - i.e. all the debt. The correct thing is for the administrators to come in, find a new owner for the business, and say "sorry folks, you're getting 40 pence in the pound" to all the bond holders.)
Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May.The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May.
There is only one political party who can be seen to lose this election from here, so it will be a very difficult campaign for Labour, obvious jitters with polls tightening once election called. 9th May BOE interest rate cut announced, 10th May UK comes out of recession with good first quarter growth, 22nd May Inflation will fall below 2% - no arguing or doubt about this because its based on energy prices. Also in the campaign period at least 1 flight will take off for Rwanda, perhaps more with one on eve of polling. The sunny economic news will contrast with the depth of credit crisis in voters minds and credit given to Rishi and Hunt for the financial turnaround pulls rug from under Labours best argument for voters to switch to them. The Rwanda flights will return Ref voters back to the Conservatives. You can say recent polling on Rwanda doesn’t suggest the Rwanda flights will generate a stampede of Ref back to Con, and I will laugh at you because that hypothetical polling is a poor predictive measure for how humans radically change their views once elections are called and Rwanda flights are happening.
I can give you the July election result right now, in shares and seats.
CON33 LAB39 LDM16 REF3 GRN4 SNP2
CON180 LAB379 LDM48 REF0 GRN1 (Bristols not Brightons) SNP21 PLD4
Consider this my entry in the inevitable PB competition when it comes.
Good morning.
Top notch spoof, unless you are actually being serious. The Conservatives will not be trusted to run the economy again for a very long time.
John Major polled 30.7% in 1997 and there is no way this time they are going to get that high. Sub 30 looks odds on, evidenced by the ongoing slump in their opinion poll ratings. They are currently polling 6-9% below the 1997 figures for the commensurate period. That’s the maths of it.
The only part of your post which has possibility of traction is the July election. An intriguing idea. Unlikely, but not impossible.
all comparisons with 1997 are meaningless - the electorate is a different beast, the electorate of 1997 would never have voted for Brexit. The electorate in 2024 are more right wing and eurosceptic than 1997. polls are not predicting a Labour victory. Polls never predict. Pollsters are not future tellers. elections throw up unexpected results, voters succumb to campaigns and messaging. Guessing this is how money can be made from Political betting. you are wrong to think because an argument is the right its the way voters will vote, if a policy or piece of spin is ludicrous you assume voters won’t vote for it. You are wrong.
Analysis of the current polling - a double digit lead not based on Labour 10+% ahead of the Conservatives. You should see it in Brexit Britain, 2024, Starmer’s just a handful of points ahead of the centre right bloc. It’s not a big Labour lead, it’s a Tory polling struggle reform, a double digit RFM total added to CON is 36% just handful of points behind Labour. These voters are Tories in the last 3 General elections - will all those voters vowing to throw their vote away on Reform go through with it in actual 2 party type FPTP General Election? I don’t think so. The Conservatives don’t need to convince lots of voters for a stunning comeback, they don’t need 75% of the electorate to change its mind between now and voting day, just that 9% threatening to throw their vote away on Reform to have second thoughts. Labour have certainly proved they can’t convince that 9% to vote for them, because that 9% and the Tories are of the same mindset the same bloc of post Brexit vote.
It’s either the most votes ever thrown away by voters in a general election, or potential is there for this election to explode the polling stalemate and the presumed result blown apart in the last weeks of the coming campaign. So I am being serious. This is a very serious way to look at it.
I’m not ramping July 4th only to later say Sunak has bottled it - i genuinely believe with inflation under 2%, interest rate cut announced, economy out of recession and growing, promise of Rwanda deterrent working, optimism gives Tories a far better result on July 4th than mixed picture and less optimism in November or December.
I am 100% convinced Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May. The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May. And the right wing pro Brexit block of 37% will come together before election day.
Scottish school holidays start Friday June 28th. Do they use schools as polling stations north of the border? Has election day ever been during school holidays before?
Now that's not a deal-breaker, and perhaps CCHQ would fancy a petty row with Scots about it. There's just about a window of opportunity to call an election in May to vote in June. Miss that, and the next real chance isn't until dissolution in September/election mid October, though all the dates then look messy until at least mid November. And I agree that he will get a better result going before the summer rather than afterwards.
But he would have got a better result had polling day been next Thursday, and a better one still had it been last year. We have to factor that into our thinking.
PM says success is “stopping the boats”. The number of migrants who’ve crossed by this small boats in the first four months of the year is at highest ever level. 7,167 people have arrived on small boats btwn Jan 1 & April 27 April, against 5,745 same period ‘23 & 6,691 ‘22
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lXv3Tt4x20
Of course gives its name to Westchester, "east" Chester being Chester-Le-Street in Co Durham
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/truss-book-becomes-a-bestseller/
It would appear that the gleeful report in the Guardian of the book's comparatively modest sales, reported equally gleefully by fat, unhappy people on PB (author's assumption), compared Truss's hardback sales with everybody else's hardback and paperback sales.
I am sure all on PB will wish the newly minted bestselling author and polemicist their hearty congratulations.
So charismatic Conservatives like Boris can occasionally win the Mayoralty if the incumbent and a Labour government are unpopular but the Tories will never win it again at a national level unless an absolute Tory landslide of 1983 proportions
'If you equated the number of Bibles read in England with the number of Bibles sold in England you would be far astray.'
The undocumented are not travelling by air (too much checking as part of airport security theatre). Which leave the ferries. Back in the Fun Times, there were document checks for passengers.
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments; love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove.
O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wand'ring bark
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come.
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom:
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headmasters'_and_Headmistresses'_Conference
I simply don’t. I’ve tried believe me. Leads to embarrassment all round
If I said “I simply fancy men” would you say, “grow up” and “stop being silly”?
No. You wouldn’t
seat, although parts of its modern incarnation fall outside the borough I believe.
The ramifications - EU relations, GFA, Brexit deal, CTA, open border etc - are substantial.
The BDSM Queen.
The fact Labour has pledged to throw away the money and time and effort spent on getting the policy here, scrap the scheme so we will never know if it could work as deterrent or not, is actually a vote winner for Sunak and the Conservatives. Can you not appreciate how perceptions of this have shifted on this over recent month’s - Rwanda Plan is now helping Tories get voters back from Reform, and the threat of cancelling it is costing Labour. Because in the minds of voters there is only one plan on the table, it might work, but it definitely won’t work under Labour because they will scrap the scheme, taking us back to the starting point with no plan in the table.
The key point here isn’t can it work, but is potential it might work that’s in the minds of voters when they vote in the General Election, because voters won’t believe Labour actually have a plan when they vote. The only party who have put a plan to stop the boats on the table is the Conservatives, Labour have pledged to scrap this before it might work. Labour have chosen to create this clear policy difference, and Labour have been very very stupid. Given clear choice between no plan, and bonkers plan that might just work, it’s obvious to all which option voters will always choose.
There is also a strong 'numerical' case for a normative state of 'one partner each' and not nine, ten or whatever. This government would call it part of the levelling up strategy. It gives the poor, the ugly and the introvert a stake in the great game. There aren't enough Scarlett Johanssons to go round.
Men going in to the workplace encounter a lot of processes which appear to be about promoting women to try and address disparities at senior level where older men still monopolise roles. It is these same men that promote these processes as a way of expressing their 'allyship' towards women. But what appears to happen in practice is that younger women get prioritised for recruitment and promotions at a lower level, which then leads to resentment amongst men. I have observed this myself and felt this frustration. In the long run though, I think that merit still triumphs, and men still have a large number of inherent advantages which perhaps aren't that obvious when you are in your 20's.
You know there are only really seven.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OX2nelvhIE
(waves from da North Ilford Ghetto)
No spring nor summer beauty hath such grace
As I have seen in one autumnal face.
Young beauties force our love, and that's a rape,
This doth but counsel, yet you cannot scape.
I am in the happy position that my target age rises in sync with my own. Exhausting at the age of 60 pursuing 25 year olds.
Exclusive: Concerns over effect on UK’s finances lead officials to believe utility should be renationalised before general election
Senior Whitehall officials fear Thames Water’s financial collapse could trigger a rise in government borrowing costs not seen since the chaos of the Liz Truss mini-budget, the Guardian can reveal.
Such is their concern about the impact on wider borrowing costs for the UK, even beyond utilities and infrastructure, that they believe Thames should be renationalised before the general election.
Officials in the Treasury and the UK’s Debt Management Office fear that, unless the UK’s biggest water company is renationalised as soon as possible, “prolonged uncertainty” about its fate could “damage confidence in UK plc at a sensitive time”, with elections in the UK and the US later this year.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/28/thames-water-collapse-borrowing-whitehall-uk-finances-bonds-liz-truss
'According to the National Poll on Healthy Aging, 40% of people between the ages of 65 and 80 are sexually active. Of these folks, 73% say they are satisfied with their sex lives. Among the people with spouses or partners, 54% said they were sexually active'
https://www.verywellhealth.com/sex-after-sixty-2966815
By 80 it is gone completely for most 'The problem is, having a sex life at all in your 80s is far from guaranteed. Only about one in 10 women aged 85 or older, and nearly one-quarter of men of that age, enjoy one.'
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2017/feb/14/lust-for-life-why-sex-is-better-in-your-80s#:~:text=The problem is, having a,of that age, enjoy one.
(Cradley Village Hall).
No marital or amatory status is intrinsically superior to another. For some men bedding 100 women and leading the life of a wastrel is what they’re made for, then other people have six partners and settle for the seventh and all is good
Both can be happy, we shouldn’t judge either. The ideal is not to hurt other people unduly. A certain amount of hurting is inevitable - there will always be broken hearts. But you don’t have to actively betray
While I'm only 34, I have found the age of women I find attractive has increased as I've gotten older.
Attraction is more complicated than who would choose for the cover of a magazine, at least for many people.
My thoughts on the male involuntary celibacy thing: alpha types are fine regardless of whether they are dinosaur throwbacks or ultra-woke new men. Indeed fully fledged champions of toxic masculinity will do fine if they have confidence and good looks. Or even just confidence despite being objectively odd looking. I remember seeing Laurence Fox in a pub in the Cotswolds with a rather beautiful girlfriend a couple of years ago as proof of the theory.
Among the nerdier, more awkward cohort it’s much more discriminatory. A reliable, nice nerd with some semblance of empathy and a decent job will eventually get the girl. A frustrated incel with dinosaur views and too many hours per day on the internet won’t.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NALBFLlTUQ
Of course around that there are a trillion variations and huzzah - human diversity is good. But that is a basic fact
I am not anticipating needing to, but I don't think I could sustain a relationship with someone not of a similar age. There is a need for a common hinterland. Someone who remembers life before cellphones.
polls are not predicting a Labour victory. Polls never predict. Pollsters are not future tellers. elections throw up unexpected results, voters succumb to campaigns and messaging. Guessing this is how money can be made from Political betting. you are wrong to think because an argument is the right its the way voters will vote, if a policy or piece of spin is ludicrous you assume voters won’t vote for it. You are wrong.
Analysis of the current polling - a double digit lead not based on Labour 10+% ahead of the Conservatives. You should see it in Brexit Britain, 2024, Starmer’s just a handful of points ahead of the centre right bloc. It’s not a big Labour lead, it’s a Tory polling struggle reform, a double digit RFM total added to CON is 36% just handful of points behind Labour. These voters are Tories in the last 3 General elections - will all those voters vowing to throw their vote away on Reform go through with it in actual 2 party type FPTP General Election? I don’t think so. The Conservatives don’t need to convince lots of voters for a stunning comeback, they don’t need 75% of the electorate to change its mind between now and voting day, just that 9% threatening to throw their vote away on Reform to have second thoughts. Labour have certainly proved they can’t convince that 9% to vote for them, because that 9% and the Tories are of the same mindset the same bloc of post Brexit vote.
It’s either the most votes ever thrown away by voters in a general election, or potential is there for this election to explode the polling stalemate and the presumed result blown apart in the last weeks of the coming campaign. So I am being serious. This is a very serious way to look at it.
I’m not ramping July 4th only to later say Sunak has bottled it - i genuinely believe with inflation under 2%, interest rate cut announced, economy out of recession and growing, promise of Rwanda deterrent working, optimism gives Tories a far better result on July 4th than mixed picture and less optimism in November or December.
I am 100% convinced Rishi Sunak is announcing the General Election date 1037hrs 13th May. The 2024 General Election is being held on 4th July. Parliament will end on 23rd May. And the right wing pro Brexit block of 37% will come together before election day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgEesTrIycU
- If it was based on showing photos of various beautiful women at different ages, or course most people choose those in their prime from a traditional standpoint.
- If you were surveyed men as to who they secretly fancy on a personal basis and would hypothetically like to take out on a date, assuming all ties and commitments did not exist, my bet is it would skew far more towards the age of the respondent.
Which is my point: in real life, for a very significant proportion of men, attraction is a result of a far more complex set of inputs than who they'd put up on their wall as a teenager.
I recognise that many men also never grow out of their preference for 18-25 year olds, and that's also fine. It was during those ages I was perrenially single and so made the most of dating my own age then, but it wouldn't be my preference now if had to return to the dating pool.
Crucially, we had an identical and highly evolved/insistent sense of humour. We constantly made each other laugh which is quite fundamental to getting on
True story. It can happen, it’s rare but it can happen. Love is where it falls
Why wouldn't I fancy her?
I've seen women at work, and even been hit on by two of them, who were 23, 25 and 27 respectively and I've just thought.. nah. Not a great career move, first of all, and secondly my wife is hotter.
[It helps that I can forward project what they'd look like 10-15 years down the road, and they'd be no match.]
So how long does it take to air-fry a head of lettuce?
I am struck by how the Dating Game for young people has changed over time. Back in the 60s and 70s it was very normal for couples to be 'courting' or 'going steady' for months or indeed years before any physical intimacy took place. Sex was much more the end product very late on in the mating process - with many opting to remain virginal until marriage or betrothal. Nowadays when couples meet , they often end up cohabiting within two or three months which suggests physical intimacy occurs at much earlier stage of a relationship. It now tends to be assumed that if X or Y has a 'girlfriend' or 'boyfriend' that they are having sex - unless the people concerned are very religious. That was not the case in he 60s and 70s - in that some guys might have had several girlfriends over a period of five or six years without physical intimacy with any of them.
Labour MSP on the prospect of Jenny Gilruth as SNP leader: “yes, please. make it so.”
Re- Thames Water - Why not let it go'bust' - and then renationalise for almost nothing? Ditto re-Royal Mail.
If the current management of Thames Water thinks the business is insolvent, they need to be calling the administrators, not lobbying the government for a bail out.
(That said, I think it is more likely the debt holders than the shareholders who are arguing for nationalisation. If it were nationalized it would be for £1. But if it was, the government would take on the entire liabilities - i.e. all the debt. The correct thing is for the administrators to come in, find a new owner for the business, and say "sorry folks, you're getting 40 pence in the pound" to all the bond holders.)
Conservative seats are Scottish school holidays start Friday June 28th. Do they use schools as polling stations north of the border? Has election day ever been during school holidays before?
Now that's not a deal-breaker, and perhaps CCHQ would fancy a petty row with Scots about it. There's just about a window of opportunity to call an election in May to vote in June. Miss that, and the next real chance isn't until dissolution in September/election mid October, though all the dates then look messy until at least mid November. And I agree that he will get a better result going before the summer rather than afterwards.
But he would have got a better result had polling day been next Thursday, and a better one still had it been last year. We have to factor that into our thinking.
And on that note, I think I'll call it a night!
PM says success is “stopping the boats”. The number of migrants who’ve crossed by this small boats in the first four months of the year is at highest ever level. 7,167 people have arrived on small boats btwn Jan 1 & April 27 April, against 5,745 same period ‘23 & 6,691 ‘22