U.S. officials have told European allies they want them to keep buying American-made arms, amid recent moves by the European Union to limit U.S. manufacturers' participation in weapons tenders, five sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
@MarqueeMark Yes indeed it is the mausoleum of Tamerlane - the emir Timur. The guy who built pyramids of skulls wherever he went. Eg when he slaughtered 70,000 citizens of Isfahan in a day
Paradoxically his mausoleum (originally intended for his son) is one of the most beautiful buildings I have seen in my life - for its interior
Stunning
He also delayed the fall of Constantinople by half a century by rolling up and smashing the Turks who had been poised to conquer the city.
U.S. officials have told European allies they want them to keep buying American-made arms, amid recent moves by the European Union to limit U.S. manufacturers' participation in weapons tenders, five sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.
Stupidity must be infectious. What did they think would happen?
I want to date Claudia Schiffer, which is almost as likely as much of the new EU defence spending going to the US. The US has chosen Russia, too late for them to whine about the consequences now. What they want is irrelevant.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31.bsky.social · 9m Chemistry to close at Aston, Bradford and Hull - while merged and threatened at Reading. More will go. Country on a self-destruct mission. www.chemistryworld.com/news/changes...
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31.bsky.social · 9m Chemistry to close at Aston, Bradford and Hull - while merged and threatened at Reading. More will go. Country on a self-destruct mission. www.chemistryworld.com/news/changes...
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
Thanks for writing the header, and sparking the debate. In the main I agree with your points, and in my own review of the show pointed last week that a 5th segment showing the impact on Katie's family and friends would have been valuable.
The paintshop guy in part 4 with his Facebook conspiracy theories about how Jamie was being framed was particulary disturbing. Seeing the effect of that sort of "Trutherism" on Katie's family and friends like Jade would have really driven the point home.
Another unexplored area was the role of online gaming (it was a gaming set up in Jamie's bedroom) in male radicalisation. I hate all those FPS games with their machine guns and helicopters, sorry @TwistedFireStopper . They also diminish the finality of death (and perhaps Jamies criminal responsibility) with their unlimited lives.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
Thanks for writing the header, and sparking the debate. In the main I agree with your points, and in my own review of the show pointed last week that a 5th segment showing the impact on Katie's family and friends would have been valuable.
The paintshop guy in part 4 with his Facebook conspiracy theories about how Jamie was being framed was particulary disturbing. Seeing the effect of that sort of "Trutherism" on Katie's family and friends like Jade would have really driven the point home.
Another unexplored area was the role of online gaming (it was a gaming set up in Jamie's bedroom) in male radicalisation. I hate all those FPS games with their machine guns and helicopters, sorry @TwistedFireStopper . They also diminish the finality of death (and perhaps Jamies criminal responsibility) with their unlimited lives.
In a country soaked with religions that promise an afterlife, it’s not FPSs that are teaching boys that death is not final.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
My answer to the pavements one would be to make them wider, and keep them clear - for example of advertising signs placed *across* half of the width of the pavement.
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
Rather a clear signal that the timing of the Rose Garden “Make America Wealthy Again” Trump tariff announcement has been shifted to after the close of the New York Stock Exchange & Nasdaq.
Could this senate vote be steadying President Trump’s hand ahead of the tariff announcement?
Suggestions some Republican senators are telling WH they will vote for @SenTimKaine motion to “terminate” the national emergency declared by Trump to levy tariffs on Canada…
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
My answer to the pavements one would be to make them wider, and keep them clear - for example of advertising signs placed *across* half of the width of the pavement.
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
It would really be simpler, than making pavements wider, for people to learn some manners and have some situational awareness and not be so sodding inconsiderate and move off to the side or walk somewhere else to chat.
Several points missed by Cyclefree. First Katie was taunting Jamie for being an incel in the programme both online and in person despite his interest in her and while that in no way excuses his actions it does show we need to encourage all teenage girls and boys to have healthy relationships otherwise boys will be drawn to the likes of Tate if they are not seen as part of some Alpha elite male group.
Second of course voyeurism and exposure both in person and online are illegal under both the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Acts.
Third programmes like Adolescence and the Post Office drama have started a conversation about the issues they address and should be shown in schools
No, she wasn't bullying him. She rejected him, after he asked her out, at a time when he thought she would be vulnerable.
Indeed it was his gang of boys who bullied her by circulating the top less photos of her around the school on Instagram.
Jamie did not particularly like Katie. He was no moonstruck Romeo. He tried to exploit her vulnerability in order to feel a sense of male power.
Anyone buying into the idea that rejection is bullying is showing their true colours and should examine their own views
That so many people seem unable to understand what the show is about, even mature intelligent adults, shows how poorly suited to schools.
There are many other interesting aspects to the show, including understanding of criminal responsibility, worthy of discussion, but this is a discussion that needs small group discussion with good chairing, and probably at A level or above. It isn't for young teens.
There is a new aspect to rejection though, brought about by social media. In the past, if advances were rejected, it was in private, or at most a subject for a couple of days' gossip among the rejector's close friends. Often nowadays that rejection is both public and permanent thanks to social media. So yes, it can be close to bullying, even if it is the rejected suitor who turns it into a serial event by constantly refreshing the page. We see this in other circumstances too. Yes, people do receive offensive messages but often the best advice is to block them rather than calling the police or asking your GP for tranquilisers.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
My answer to the pavements one would be to make them wider, and keep them clear - for example of advertising signs placed *across* half of the width of the pavement.
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
One of my memories of being a councillor is dealing with the sodding A Boards from coffee shops et al in Kendal, Windermere, Kirkby Lonsdale. You could use the entire council allocation for Planning Enforcement on removing those sodding things. Never went to court they removed them. Soon as they thought the council had something else to distract it, back they came. Seems they are very effective at attracting the low intelligence customers coffee shops and eateries need to survive. It is because of this experience that I NEVER go into any coffee shop which obstructs the public footway. Please follow my example on this and you will be doing a GOOD thing.
My understanding is that electric scooters are not permitted on pavements, legally.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31.bsky.social · 9m Chemistry to close at Aston, Bradford and Hull - while merged and threatened at Reading. More will go. Country on a self-destruct mission. www.chemistryworld.com/news/changes...
My old civ eng department at QMW (now Queen Mary's...) shut down years ago. The courses, whilst valuable to the country, require expensive facilities, so are easier to cut than more humanities based courses.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
Never mind pavement parking, my colleague yesterday had witnessed blatant pavement driving. A procession of RRs and other SUVs driving along with the nearside wheels halfway across the pavement in order to pass oncoming traffic.
Rather a clear signal that the timing of the Rose Garden “Make America Wealthy Again” Trump tariff announcement has been shifted to after the close of the New York Stock Exchange & Nasdaq.
Could this senate vote be steadying President Trump’s hand ahead of the tariff announcement?
Suggestions some Republican senators are telling WH they will vote for @SenTimKaine motion to “terminate” the national emergency declared by Trump to levy tariffs on Canada…
It has been suggested that one restraint on Trump will be Congress members losing half their stock exchange fortunes as the market crashes. Maybe we are starting to see that. The other interesting question is whether tensions between what we might call the Musk (sack everyone and import stuff) and Vance (protect American jobs and buy American) wings are coming to the fore.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
My answer to the pavements one would be to make them wider, and keep them clear - for example of advertising signs placed *across* half of the width of the pavement.
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
It would really be simpler, than making pavements wider, for people to learn some manners and have some situational awareness and not be so sodding inconsiderate and move off to the side or walk somewhere else to chat.
That ad board however is new levels of stupid.
Anyone else see that ad board as “A very special FU to anyone in a wheelchair”?
US economy data point: my US book sales (for six different books) on Amazon have halved over the last month, compared with the same month last year. Have people given up on discretionary spending?
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That's not really comparable. The Huntingdon offender (or non-offender defending on your view) advanced on the lady who was killed yelling at her. No, let's not reopen that one.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
I’m trying to remember which carriage class has overhead luggage racks that are so small that they can’t take hand luggage of the airline type in any orientation.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
My understanding is that electric scooters are not permitted on pavements, legally.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
To be honest, whether legal or not, it doesn't really matter. If you shoved one of them into the road, I think you should be in a lot of trouble. But if you simply refuse to get out of their way? Then that's their problem irrespective of whose right of way it is. And I felt that the woman in Huntingdon was in the latter category and the cyclist should have been much more circumspect.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
Never mind pavement parking, my colleague yesterday had witnessed blatant pavement driving. A procession of RRs and other SUVs driving along with the nearside wheels halfway across the pavement in order to pass oncoming traffic.
That should be amenable to Operation SNAP, for careless or reckless driving, or maybe driving on the pavement.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That's not really comparable. The Huntingdon offender (or non-offender defending on your view) advanced on the lady who was killed yelling at her. No, let's not reopen that one.
Standing still is not really the same.
No, let's reopen it.
As I've just said, shoving someone obviously would put her in the wrong. But I don't think she did that. Yelling and gesticulating? Sorry, not nearly enough for me. The cyclist should have slowed down, got off, and walked past her.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
My answer to the pavements one would be to make them wider, and keep them clear - for example of advertising signs placed *across* half of the width of the pavement.
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
It would really be simpler, than making pavements wider, for people to learn some manners and have some situational awareness and not be so sodding inconsiderate and move off to the side or walk somewhere else to chat.
That ad board however is new levels of stupid.
Anyone else see that ad board as “A very special FU to anyone in a wheelchair”?
There are others around that area - including on shared pavements.
I think the proximal cause is around there having been either a phone box or a bus shelter there, and rather than simply clear the obstruction BT or whoever it is fight to keep it on the basis that it is "no worse than before", and it makes them (and the Council?) money.
It's a matter of priorities being wrong. I wonder if that can be addressed under the Highway Act 1980 "Obstruction on a Public Highway" provisions (as used for farmers who put gateposts or barbed wire on public footpaths). Hmm.
My understanding is that electric scooters are not permitted on pavements, legally.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
To be honest, whether legal or not, it doesn't really matter. If you shoved one of them into the road, I think you should be in a lot of trouble. But if you simply refuse to get out of their way? Then that's their problem irrespective of whose right of way it is. And I felt that the woman in Huntingdon was in the latter category and the cyclist should have been much more circumspect.
I actively want to see people (kids/adults, I don't care) get hurt whilst riding illegal e vehicles on public roads and pavements. The fuckers have no consideration for those of us using the public spaces legally, so I really don't care what happens to them. I've had too many near misses to have any compassion for them. There's a group of ne'er do wells in Loughborough who take great delight in wheelieing their stolen e bikes through the town wearing hoods up and balaclavas. I'd pay to watch one of them get cleared up by a bin wagon.
Following concerted and long running campaigns, drink driving and smoking in public are now socially unacceptable. Both took time and money to significantly reduce, even though they have not been totally eliminated. We need the same effort, time and money to be put into eliminating misogyny.
Mrs. F complaints that she, and all women, have been victims of misogyny all her life. She is now in her 70s. In any civilised society, this is unacceptable.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
I’m trying to remember which carriage class has overhead luggage racks that are so small that they can’t take hand luggage of the airline type in any orientation.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
My particular gripe is the Lizzie Line trains - which go to *Heathrow* so nowhere that you might expect much bulky luggage - have nowhere to leave cases at all, and there are no overhead racks so I can get my rucksack out of the way on busy trains (unlike their predecessors), because of course commuters also never carry any hand luggage.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That's not really comparable. The Huntingdon offender (or non-offender defending on your view) advanced on the lady who was killed yelling at her. No, let's not reopen that one.
Standing still is not really the same.
No, let's reopen it.
As I've just said, shoving someone obviously would put her in the wrong. But I don't think she did that. Yelling and gesticulating? Sorry, not nearly enough for me. The cyclist should have slowed down, got off, and walked past her.
It was not, despite what some say, a cycle path. That particular stretch of pavement is not one that cyclists and pedestrians can safely negotiate together.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
Rather a clear signal that the timing of the Rose Garden “Make America Wealthy Again” Trump tariff announcement has been shifted to after the close of the New York Stock Exchange & Nasdaq.
Could this senate vote be steadying President Trump’s hand ahead of the tariff announcement?
Suggestions some Republican senators are telling WH they will vote for @SenTimKaine motion to “terminate” the national emergency declared by Trump to levy tariffs on Canada…
It has been suggested that one restraint on Trump will be Congress members losing half their stock exchange fortunes as the market crashes. Maybe we are starting to see that. The other interesting question is whether tensions between what we might call the Musk (sack everyone and import stuff) and Vance (protect American jobs and buy American) wings are coming to the fore.
There was always going to be a point when the Trusk rhetoric met the market reality. Still no idea where it leads though. The GOP can hardly repudiate Trumpism in all its forms now
My guess in the short term is Musk gets thrown overboard first
While I generally like Cyxlefree's comments, this one seems off-target. The Adolescence mini-series focused overwhelmingly on the boy, with the moderately rude rejection by the girl mentioned only briefly and no suggestion that it was an understandable cause of the murder. "The plot itself suggests that the girl’s behaviour was somehow responsible for Jamie’s behaviour" is entirely wrong - rather, it illustrates that even mild rejection can lead to murder because of the boy's warped personality, and the series is overwhelmingly about what warped his personality. It seemed helpful in illustrating Cyclefree's other points, to the extent that it arreested the PM's attention and stimulated the discussion that we're having.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
I’m trying to remember which carriage class has overhead luggage racks that are so small that they can’t take hand luggage of the airline type in any orientation.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
My particular gripe is the Lizzie Line trains - which go to *Heathrow* so nowhere that you might expect much bulky luggage - have nowhere to leave cases at all, and there are no overhead racks so I can get my rucksack out of the way on busy trains (unlike their predecessors), because of course commuters also never carry any hand luggage.
The Heathrow Express trains were actually designed to expect people with luggage. To and from an airport. Crazy, yes?
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
Following concerted and long running campaigns, drink driving and smoking in public are now socially unacceptable. Both took time and money to significantly reduce, even though they have not been totally eliminated. We need the same effort, time and money to be put into eliminating misogyny.
Mrs. F complaints that she, and all women, have been victims of misogyny all her life. She is now in her 70s. In any civilised society, this is unacceptable.
Agreed, although I note smoking still kills about 75,000 people per year in the UK. (Murders are about 570. Deaths from drink driving around 300. Deaths from drinking alcohol around 10,000.)
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
When I was fourteen or so, one of my schoolteachers played "If" to us. Which was set in a school rather like ours...
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
My understanding is that electric scooters are not permitted on pavements, legally.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
To be honest, whether legal or not, it doesn't really matter. If you shoved one of them into the road, I think you should be in a lot of trouble. But if you simply refuse to get out of their way? Then that's their problem irrespective of whose right of way it is. And I felt that the woman in Huntingdon was in the latter category and the cyclist should have been much more circumspect.
I actively want to see people (kids/adults, I don't care) get hurt whilst riding illegal e vehicles on public roads and pavements. The fuckers have no consideration for those of us using the public spaces legally, so I really don't care what happens to them. I've had too many near misses to have any compassion for them. There's a group of ne'er do wells in Loughborough who take great delight in wheelieing their stolen e bikes through the town wearing hoods up and balaclavas. I'd pay to watch one of them get cleared up by a bin wagon.
In my limited experience, bikes are worse than ebikes but round here the latter are not engaged in phone-snatching (touch wood).
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
But, then again, assault doesn’t have to involve actual touching. Scaring someone is enough…
Catherine Blaiklock, who co-founded the Brexit Party, now Reform UK, is planning to stand in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election for the English Democrats.
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
When I was fourteen or so, one of my schoolteachers played "If" to us. Which was set in a school rather like ours...
My terrible British political history teacher played the Blackadder episode where Baldrick becomes an MP about 3 times in a term because it was the only video he could think of which dealt with early 19th century politics.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
I’m trying to remember which carriage class has overhead luggage racks that are so small that they can’t take hand luggage of the airline type in any orientation.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
My particular gripe is the Lizzie Line trains - which go to *Heathrow* so nowhere that you might expect much bulky luggage - have nowhere to leave cases at all, and there are no overhead racks so I can get my rucksack out of the way on busy trains (unlike their predecessors), because of course commuters also never carry any hand luggage.
The Heathrow Express trains were actually designed to expect people with luggage. To and from an airport. Crazy, yes?
The Piccadilly Line trains that go to Heathrow have designated spaces for luggage (and prams) too, albeit mostly flat floorspace, which, with the wheeliebags people bring nowadays, tend to be a bit crap.
The moment the train accelerates, the bags start rolling unless they're stored flat.
But, yes, obviously too much to hope for on Crossrail, despite the £20 billion it ended up costing.
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
When I was fourteen or so, one of my schoolteachers played "If" to us. Which was set in a school rather like ours...
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
We didn’t get WED at school but I certainly watched it. The miracle weapon of 480 round machine pistols made me wonder why Germany didn’t win the war.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
The conductor on my train yesterday had to ask about 10 people to make room for a woman with a pram. Pavement parking is a growing issue too.
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
That one is understandable though, as trains mostly have nowhere to put luggage.
I’m trying to remember which carriage class has overhead luggage racks that are so small that they can’t take hand luggage of the airline type in any orientation.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
My particular gripe is the Lizzie Line trains - which go to *Heathrow* so nowhere that you might expect much bulky luggage - have nowhere to leave cases at all, and there are no overhead racks so I can get my rucksack out of the way on busy trains (unlike their predecessors), because of course commuters also never carry any hand luggage.
The Heathrow Express trains were actually designed to expect people with luggage. To and from an airport. Crazy, yes?
The Piccadilly Line trains that go to Heathrow have designated spaces for luggage (and prams) too, albeit mostly flat floorspace, which, with the wheeliebags people bring nowadays, tend to be a bit crap.
The moment the train accelerates, the bags start rolling unless they're stored flat.
But, yes, obviously too much to hope for on Crossrail, despite the £20 billion it ended up costing.
Neither the standard trains that go to Gatwick nor Stansted have much room for luggage. And, yes, some classes have overhead racks that are too small for any sort of substantial bag, although that's not exclusively a UK problem as I encountered it on some of the newer stock on my trip round NL, At and DE last year.
The other thing that is incorrect is putting luggage racks exclusively near the doors as that is an invitation to theft. It needs to go where you can keep an eye on it.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
But, then again, assault doesn’t have to involve actual touching. Scaring someone is enough…
True, but irrelevant to my comment, which was a response to: "It's OK to push someone into moving traffic?"
AFAIAA it was ever alleged that she 'pushed' the other lady. Yet that has become prevalent on t'Internet when the story is discussed.
As for being scared, if you are partially sighted, having a cyclist unexpectedly coming towards you might be more than a little scary....
There's one other point I'd make: (from 1): "The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
If any official states that stretch of pavement is a shared cycleway, then the council should be up on corporate manslaughter charges. It is so obviously unsuitable, and an accident waiting to happen...
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
But, then again, assault doesn’t have to involve actual touching. Scaring someone is enough…
I don't think shouting "get off the fucking pavement" from a distance at a cyclist illegally riding on the pavement is assault. Maybe behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace, but the cyclist was 77 and unlikely to engage in a breach of the peace.
Catherine Blaiklock, who co-founded the Brexit Party, now Reform UK, is planning to stand in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election for the English Democrats.
Would be somewhat amusing if Labour held the seat because the EDs took Reform votes
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Several points missed by Cyclefree. First Katie was taunting Jamie for being an incel in the programme both online and in person despite his interest in her and while that in no way excuses his actions it does show we need to encourage all teenage girls and boys to have healthy relationships otherwise boys will be drawn to the likes of Tate if they are not seen as part of some Alpha elite male group.
Second of course voyeurism and exposure both in person and online are illegal under both the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Acts.
Third programmes like Adolescence and the Post Office drama have started a conversation about the issues they address and should be shown in schools
No, she wasn't bullying him. She rejected him, after he asked her out, at a time when he thought she would be vulnerable.
Indeed it was his gang of boys who bullied her by circulating the top less photos of her around the school on Instagram.
Jamie did not particularly like Katie. He was no moonstruck Romeo. He tried to exploit her vulnerability in order to feel a sense of male power.
Anyone buying into the idea that rejection is bullying is showing their true colours and should examine their own views
That so many people seem unable to understand what the show is about, even mature intelligent adults, shows how poorly suited to schools.
There are many other interesting aspects to the show, including understanding of criminal responsibility, worthy of discussion, but this is a discussion that needs small group discussion with good chairing, and probably at A level or above. It isn't for young teens.
She made offensive comments about him on social media and Instagram as the programme made clear.
Incels do not suddenly emerge from nothing, even if nothing excuses his actions
Catherine Blaiklock, who co-founded the Brexit Party, now Reform UK, is planning to stand in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election for the English Democrats.
Would be somewhat amusing if Labour held the seat because the EDs took Reform votes
It would! Although unless they have some particular on-the-ground campaigning strength we don't know about, I presume the EDs will lose their deposit. Their areas of strength are limited and not around Runcorn, are they? They got 0.5% at the general election in Bury South.
@FrankLuntz “With @Tesla having trouble selling new Cybertrucks, the automaker is reportedly not taking any as trade-ins.
Many Cybertruck owners reported trying to trade in the truck for a new vehicle and were told the company currently doesn’t accept its own vehicle as a trade-in.”
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Thank you for that, it's superb! That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.
We on the other hand have this.
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
My understanding is that electric scooters are not permitted on pavements, legally.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
To be honest, whether legal or not, it doesn't really matter. If you shoved one of them into the road, I think you should be in a lot of trouble. But if you simply refuse to get out of their way? Then that's their problem irrespective of whose right of way it is. And I felt that the woman in Huntingdon was in the latter category and the cyclist should have been much more circumspect.
I actively want to see people (kids/adults, I don't care) get hurt whilst riding illegal e vehicles on public roads and pavements. The fuckers have no consideration for those of us using the public spaces legally, so I really don't care what happens to them. I've had too many near misses to have any compassion for them. There's a group of ne'er do wells in Loughborough who take great delight in wheelieing their stolen e bikes through the town wearing hoods up and balaclavas. I'd pay to watch one of them get cleared up by a bin wagon.
That's a policing of ASBO matter, and police force policy. The pressure point ultimately should be the PCC, I think.
The police can seize them on the spot, as they are mopeds / motorbikes with no insurance as required. Siimilarly registration, proper helmets etc.
In Notts, the police tend to state that they need more powers, which - even though they might help and I don't mind them - in general powers already exist.
Here, the Leeanderthal man has made an issue of this, which is a nice difference from Mansfield where there were one or two small incidents and Captain Mainwaring jerked his knee and tried to bring a 24-7 cycling ban under a PSPO, which would result in bullying of disabled people by undertrained Council or BID Officers.
Someone known to me has a meeting with the Minister about PSPOs soon, so I'm doing some notes this week.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Thank you for that, it's superb! That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.
We on the other hand have this.
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Thank you for that, it's superb! That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.
We on the other hand have this.
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
Basically, anyone who likes dressing up should be kept as far from power as possible. Maybe the House of Lords achieves this objective, mind.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That's not really comparable. The Huntingdon offender (or non-offender defending on your view) advanced on the lady who was killed yelling at her. No, let's not reopen that one.
Standing still is not really the same.
No, let's reopen it.
As I've just said, shoving someone obviously would put her in the wrong. But I don't think she did that. Yelling and gesticulating? Sorry, not nearly enough for me. The cyclist should have slowed down, got off, and walked past her.
It was not, despite what some say, a cycle path. That particular stretch of pavement is not one that cyclists and pedestrians can safely negotiate together.
Negotiating street furniture is very much a feature even on the NCN, I'm afraid. I think the technicality is a waste of energy really, whatever the de jure or de facto case.
The whole incident and prosecution was highly unusual, and distracts from what harms and kills pedestrians and cyclists in the main. The lesson is that cyclists should feel comfortable using the carriageway, whether that's via quieter streets or segregated infrastructure.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
But, then again, assault doesn’t have to involve actual touching. Scaring someone is enough…
I don't think shouting "get off the fucking pavement" from a distance at a cyclist illegally riding on the pavement is assault. Maybe behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace, but the cyclist was 77 and unlikely to engage in a breach of the peace.
“Common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence. ”
What kind of threat scared the angels off the pinhead?
For the 2nd week running we have 3 local by-elections tomorrow. There are Lab defences in Lincoln and NeathPortTalbot and a Lib Dem defence in St. Helens.
What we have failed to understand or teach or show is that we – especially men and boys but not just them – must know the extent of our strength and power, the limits of it, why we have to value and exercise self-restraint and self-control and why we have to think of the effect of our behaviour on others
But overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of people - women as well as men - behave in exactly these ways. This needs to be accounted for.
When Cycle free says "We have failed" I do not know who she includes, but tentatively I count Cyclefree out. And me.
I was referring to society as a whole. Lots of us do try to behave well and teach our children well. But I look at our society and I see one in which self-restraint is not valued and a selfish individualism seems to be its main animating force.
The drama is a good drama. It is not an educational tool. And the reaction to it by politicians has been pathetic. Yes there is a serious issue about misogyny - but the underlying one is about how best to channel the energies and talents of boys is fruitful ways, for them and all of us. Misogyny is one aspect of this. But it is not the only one, which is why I referenced the killing of males by other males. The conversation needs to go wider.
I was also interested in why in all the discussion about it there was so little reference to the victim - which is itself a sign of misogyny - even though I quite understand why, from a dramatic perspective, the writers concentrated on the boy and his father. But what makes a good drama does not make for a thoughtful educational tool, which is the point I was trying to make.
And also that dramas can allow us to express outrage but effective action takes something more, something which is being ignored by the politicians in this soundbite era.
PS The Bates drama was very good at showing in a human way the reality of a very complex PO scandal. That is not at all easy and all credit to the writer. She also wrote a very good drama about a real life "honour" killing - Honour, which led to no political action or national conversation at all - Asian girls being at the bottom of everyone's concerns, shamefully.
This is a problem - as Casino pointed out yesterday, the rise of notices warning that abuse won’t be tolerated is a result of the amount of people who seem to think they are entitled to whatever they want.
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
A favourite is “Pavement Combing”
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
Ha, a kid on an electric scooter was clearly very disgruntled when I didn't move aside on a pavement for him. There was (just) enough room to my side but I'd grown tired of making space for morons who shouldn't be there.
That conviction was an utter travesty. And I say that as a cyclist, runner and walker who actually knows that stretch of road very well.
It's OK to push someone into moving traffic? The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
I don't think she pushed the poor lady, and AIUI it was never claimed in court that contact was made between the two. Also, bear in mind that the lady in question was partially sighted and had cerebral palsy, so might have slower reactions against cyclists than many other people.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
But, then again, assault doesn’t have to involve actual touching. Scaring someone is enough…
I don't think shouting "get off the fucking pavement" from a distance at a cyclist illegally riding on the pavement is assault. Maybe behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace, but the cyclist was 77 and unlikely to engage in a breach of the peace.
“Common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence. ”
What kind of threat scared the angels off the pinhead?
She started shouting at the cyclist when they were some distance away (so the cyclist didn't surprise her) and she made a physical motion towards the cyclist when she was near. "claimed that Mrs Ward had been cycling "at high speed" and that she was "anxious I was going to get hit by it" so "flinched out with her left arm to protect herself"."
The original decision to convict was rational, she's moved her left arm out towards the cyclist causing them to fall into the road.
If it had been a similarly aged cyclist and Grey had fallen into the road and been killed there'd have been a media campaign for them to get life.
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
When I was fourteen or so, one of my schoolteachers played "If" to us. Which was set in a school rather like ours...
Comments
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-officials-object-european-push-buy-weapons-locally-2025-04-02/
Stupidity must be infectious. What did they think would happen?
I’m personally noticing (might be getting old and grumpy) a huge rise in absolutely inconsiderate arseholes who feel it’s perfectly acceptable to stop and have chats on pavements forcing everyone else to walk on the road whilst they live their best lives and added to this is the sheer number of cretins who seem unable to walk along without staring at their phone and give no shits that everyone else needs to dodge them.
There is an idea that a huge portion of society are afflicted these days by “main character syndrome” where they are totally the centre of a film of their lives and so everything truly revolves around them and so cannot cope when it’s not how they like things to be.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31.bsky.social
·
9m
Chemistry to close at Aston, Bradford and Hull - while merged and threatened at Reading. More will go. Country on a self-destruct mission.
www.chemistryworld.com/news/changes...
My ★★★★½ review of Adolescence on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/9dAy8p
The paintshop guy in part 4 with his Facebook conspiracy theories about how Jamie was being framed was particulary disturbing. Seeing the effect of that sort of "Trutherism" on Katie's family and friends like Jade would have really driven the point home.
Another unexplored area was the role of online gaming (it was a gaming set up in Jamie's bedroom) in male radicalisation. I hate all those FPS games with their machine guns and helicopters, sorry @TwistedFireStopper . They also diminish the finality of death (and perhaps Jamies criminal responsibility) with their unlimited lives.
Edit: No, but certainly not easy to see.
A group of people walking, side by side, in a Hollywood skirmish line (1m apart from each other)
For full effect, 80% are head down in a mobile.
Oblivious to anyone they are pushing through. I’ve even seen collisions with people daring to walk the other way.
The most splendid version is seen down by the river Thames. Where on a weekend, some roads are pedestrian dominated. So you get such groups occupying a pavement *and* the whole of a two way road….
(Also a regular issue with people putting suitcases in disabled and cycle storage areas and refusing to move them when asked).
For example, my pic for today is of an advertising board across the pavement near Sheffield Station which blocks more than half of the width.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/WD5enbFtvk3zWEak6
(Good morning, everyone.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68641891
And this man apparently knows how to sort out the UK.
Rather a clear signal that the timing of the Rose Garden “Make America Wealthy Again” Trump tariff announcement has been shifted to after the close of the New York Stock Exchange & Nasdaq.
Could this senate vote be steadying President Trump’s hand ahead of the tariff announcement?
Suggestions some Republican senators are telling WH they will vote for @SenTimKaine motion to “terminate” the national emergency declared by Trump to levy tariffs on Canada…
https://x.com/faisalislam/status/1907358849784218016
That ad board however is new levels of stupid.
I'd also argue it's ridiculous expecting pedestrians to leap aside for young idiots on electric scooters, who use them on the assumption space will part for them as if they're Moses heading for the Red Sea.
Standing still is not really the same.
Given that many people use such wheely cases for all their travel, this seemed an especial fail.
As I've just said, shoving someone obviously would put her in the wrong. But I don't think she did that. Yelling and gesticulating? Sorry, not nearly enough for me. The cyclist should have slowed down, got off, and walked past her.
I think the proximal cause is around there having been either a phone box or a bus shelter there, and rather than simply clear the obstruction BT or whoever it is fight to keep it on the basis that it is "no worse than before", and it makes them (and the Council?) money.
It's a matter of priorities being wrong. I wonder if that can be addressed under the Highway Act 1980 "Obstruction on a Public Highway" provisions (as used for farmers who put gateposts or barbed wire on public footpaths). Hmm.
There's a group of ne'er do wells in Loughborough who take great delight in wheelieing their stolen e bikes through the town wearing hoods up and balaclavas. I'd pay to watch one of them get cleared up by a bin wagon.
Mrs. F complaints that she, and all women, have been victims of misogyny all her life. She is now in her 70s. In any civilised society, this is unacceptable.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/GHC611EpEHdc2PAP9
It was not, despite what some say, a cycle path. That particular stretch of pavement is not one that cyclists and pedestrians can safely negotiate together.
The conviction was rational IMO. If she'd just not moved or just shouted fine but she physically caused the other person to fall into the path of a moving vehicle.
My guess in the short term is Musk gets thrown overboard first
https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1907130858491793556
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The whole thing was an utter tragedy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ1LG08ssaM (probably NSFW)
https://www.reddit.com/r/uniformporn/comments/rsux5t/formal_uniform_of_the_nyc_department_of_sanitation/
The moment the train accelerates, the bags start rolling unless they're stored flat.
But, yes, obviously too much to hope for on Crossrail, despite the £20 billion it ended up costing.
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lPTd0rPAPg
We were force fed Hamlet and Macbeth.
The other thing that is incorrect is putting luggage racks exclusively near the doors as that is an invitation to theft. It needs to go where you can keep an eye on it.
AFAIAA it was ever alleged that she 'pushed' the other lady. Yet that has become prevalent on t'Internet when the story is discussed.
As for being scared, if you are partially sighted, having a cyclist unexpectedly coming towards you might be more than a little scary....
There's one other point I'd make: (from 1): "The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
If any official states that stretch of pavement is a shared cycleway, then the council should be up on corporate manslaughter charges. It is so obviously unsuitable, and an accident waiting to happen...
(1): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-64824436
Incels do not suddenly emerge from nothing, even if nothing excuses his actions
“With
@Tesla
having trouble selling new Cybertrucks, the automaker is reportedly not taking any as trade-ins.
Many Cybertruck owners reported trying to trade in the truck for a new vehicle and were told the company currently doesn’t accept its own vehicle as a trade-in.”
https://x.com/FrankLuntz/status/1907230202901700735
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
The police can seize them on the spot, as they are mopeds / motorbikes with no insurance as required. Siimilarly registration, proper helmets etc.
In Notts, the police tend to state that they need more powers, which - even though they might help and I don't mind them - in general powers already exist.
Here, the Leeanderthal man has made an issue of this, which is a nice difference from Mansfield where there were one or two small incidents and Captain Mainwaring jerked his knee and tried to bring a 24-7 cycling ban under a PSPO, which would result in bullying of disabled people by undertrained Council or BID Officers.
Someone known to me has a meeting with the Minister about PSPOs soon, so I'm doing some notes this week.
Maybe the House of Lords achieves this objective, mind.
https://x.com/leftiestats/status/1907344068394291316
A stunning *13* Cabinet ministers would be defeated:
🔴 Angela Rayner (to REF)
🔴 Shabana Mahmood (to IND)
🔴 Ed Miliband (to REF)
🔴 Bridget Phillipson (to REF)
🔴 Wes Streeting (to IND)
🔴 Rachel Reeves (to REF)
🔴 Liz Kendall (to REF)
🔴 Yvette Cooper (to REF)
🔴 John Healey (to REF)
🔴 Jonathan Reynolds (to REF)
🔴 Heidi Alexander (to CON)
🔴 Lisa Nandy (to REF)
🔴 Pat McFadden (to REF)
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=26&LAB=21&LIB=13&Reform=25&Green=7&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024base
The whole incident and prosecution was highly unusual, and distracts from what harms and kills pedestrians and cyclists in the main. The lesson is that cyclists should feel comfortable using the carriageway, whether that's via quieter streets or segregated infrastructure.
What kind of threat scared the angels off the pinhead?
"claimed that Mrs Ward had been cycling "at high speed" and that she was "anxious I was going to get hit by it" so "flinched out with her left arm to protect herself"."
The original decision to convict was rational, she's moved her left arm out towards the cyclist causing them to fall into the road.
If it had been a similarly aged cyclist and Grey had fallen into the road and been killed there'd have been a media campaign for them to get life.
https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1907381528666980519