Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Betting on the next Pope? That would be an ecumenical matter – politicalbetting.com

13

Comments

  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,198
    edited 10:09AM

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,619

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    On topic: smoked haddock with poached egg and proper crunchy wholemeal toast - lavished with salty butter - is the breakfast of emperors


    I always have it at posh hotels if it’s available

    Great breakfast. My summer lunch alternative with Smoked Haddock is SH with new potatoes crushed with salty butter and pepper, beetroot and horseradish. Perfect flavour mix.
    Mmm. Sounds good. Smoked haddock is lush

    When you have that breakfast and you break the yolk and the golden goodness mixes with the fishy umami and you mop it up with salty crunchy toast. Then a gulp of strong tea?

    Omg

    Sets you up for the whole day but in a brilliant healthy way that a full English does not. A full English weighs you down and you need a nap
    It's Bond's favourite meal of the day.

    "Breakfast is prepared by May, his Scottish housekeeper and she takes it to him on a tray with a copy of the Times. At home his breakfast consists of: Two cups of very strong coffee from De Bry in New Oxford Street brewed in an American Chemex and drunk black without sugar. A brown speckled egg from a French Marans hen boiled for 3 1/3 minutes served in a dark blue egg cup with a gold ring round the top. Two thick slices of wholewheat toast with Jersey butter and the choice of Tiptree “Little Scarlet” strawberry jam, Cooper’s vintage oxford marmalade and Norwegian Heather Honey from Fortnum’s. We also learn that the eggs are provided by a friend of May and that Bond dislikes white eggs. The coffee pot and the silver on the tray are Queen Anne, and the china is Minton, of the same dark blue and gold and white as the egg-cup."

    https://www.thejamesbonddossier.com/books/from-russia-with-love-book/from-russia-with-love-food-and-drink-from-the-novel.htm
    The reason why Bond works so well here is that it goes further than just sex and violence: it's sex, sadism and snobbery, which explains precisely why it's so intoxicating to us Brits.
    It’s such a weird dated snobbery. We’re meant to be impressed that he takes Tiptree jam, and Cooper’s marmalade. Lol

    I believe in one bond book he has steak chips and Liebfraumilch wine

    Of course it was all exotic to impoverished Brits in the postwar era
    What Victoria Coren-Mitchell described as Bond's weird, camp fussiness about everything he eats and drinks.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6WiXmPdd3E&t=16s
    Misplaced snobbery as well, Tiptree thick cut is a better marmalade than Coopers.
    McDonalds have a toasted muffin with Tiptree strawberry jam on their breakfast menu.
    https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/muffin-jam.html
    Just had a McDonald's Toffee Latte. Is it supposed to taste of methylated spirit?
    Only if you get a really good one.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232

    Sean_F said:

    I'd eat much more fish if I had access to a proper fishmonger. There used to be loads of fish shops - a quick google tells me that there are now only 950 independent fishmongers in the UK, compared with several thousand a few decades ago. Most fish is sold in supermarkets, and it's often bland and tasteless, for whatever reason.

    A good fishmonger’s is worth its weight in gold. Fish is only worth eating if it’s fresh.

    We lost F. Berndes in Enfield, five years ago, although Waitrose still does fresh fish. There is a mobile fish van at the market, once a week, which does wonderful crab and smoked salmon.
    We have Mark Lobb in Dartmouth, whose fish is brought in straight from Brixham. Quite a character, but one of the best purveyors of fresh fish you could hope to find.
    Hat tip for "the Fishmonger's Cat" in Porthcawl.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,641

    Nigelb said:

    Trade war is still hotting up.
    And China is refusing US requests to talk.

    China Imposes Controls on Rare Earth Exports… First Target Is South Korea

    “Don’t Export Products Containing Rare Earths to the U.S.” … Korea and Others Face Intensified Pressure

    Transformers Manufacturers Asked to Give Guarantees… Battery and Aerospace Sectors on High Alert
    Warning of “No Transshipment”—Violators Likely to See Rare Earth Supplies Cut Off

    It has been confirmed that the Chinese government sent Korean companies a warning notice stating that it would impose sanctions if they exported products made with Chinese rare earths to U.S. defense contractors. Just as the U.S. has controlled indirect exports of American-made semiconductors to China, China is now actively enforcing “third-country export controls” on the strategic mineral rare earths. Concerns are growing that Korean firms are being forced to choose sides in the U.S.–China struggle for dominance.

    According to industry sources on April 22, transformer manufacturer Company A recently received an official letter from China’s Ministry of Commerce declaring, “You must guarantee that power equipment such as transformers containing Chinese medium rare earths will not be exported to U.S. defense firms or the U.S. military, and bear in mind that any violations may incur sanctions.”

    Although the notice did not specify the exact penalties, industry insiders interpret it to mean that if any indirect exports are uncovered, China will halt shipments of its medium rare earths. Transformer manufacturer Company B is also reported to have received the same notice.

    The government has determined that, in addition to transformer makers, most companies in sectors that import and use Chinese strategic minerals—such as secondary batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace, and medical equipment—have received identical warnings. A government official commented, “It appears that China has begun to implement third-country export controls across all of its strategic minerals.”
    ..

    https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1914613174323884308

    What’s sauce for the goose…..wonder how Trump will react to a taste of his own medicine?
    Denial, probably ?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,474
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trade war is still hotting up.
    And China is refusing US requests to talk.

    China Imposes Controls on Rare Earth Exports… First Target Is South Korea

    “Don’t Export Products Containing Rare Earths to the U.S.” … Korea and Others Face Intensified Pressure

    Transformers Manufacturers Asked to Give Guarantees… Battery and Aerospace Sectors on High Alert
    Warning of “No Transshipment”—Violators Likely to See Rare Earth Supplies Cut Off

    It has been confirmed that the Chinese government sent Korean companies a warning notice stating that it would impose sanctions if they exported products made with Chinese rare earths to U.S. defense contractors. Just as the U.S. has controlled indirect exports of American-made semiconductors to China, China is now actively enforcing “third-country export controls” on the strategic mineral rare earths. Concerns are growing that Korean firms are being forced to choose sides in the U.S.–China struggle for dominance.

    According to industry sources on April 22, transformer manufacturer Company A recently received an official letter from China’s Ministry of Commerce declaring, “You must guarantee that power equipment such as transformers containing Chinese medium rare earths will not be exported to U.S. defense firms or the U.S. military, and bear in mind that any violations may incur sanctions.”

    Although the notice did not specify the exact penalties, industry insiders interpret it to mean that if any indirect exports are uncovered, China will halt shipments of its medium rare earths. Transformer manufacturer Company B is also reported to have received the same notice.

    The government has determined that, in addition to transformer makers, most companies in sectors that import and use Chinese strategic minerals—such as secondary batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace, and medical equipment—have received identical warnings. A government official commented, “It appears that China has begun to implement third-country export controls across all of its strategic minerals.”
    ..

    https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1914613174323884308

    What’s sauce for the goose…..wonder how Trump will react to a taste of his own medicine?
    Denial, probably ?
    He'll blame someone else. I'm sure there'll be a 'secret' message group having a go at Europe.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,915
    rkrkrk said:

    Superb news that Starmer will (hopefully) get access to EU defence procurement contracts for UK.
    I think it's an industry where lack of orders means companies forget how to manufacture efficiently at scale. Missing out on this defence bonanza could have permanently damaged UK defence.

    I assume while the finance comes from EU, each member state chooses what they buy. If that's right, then sure the French will likely pick French arms, but many other countries will choose British if they are competitive.

    Poland is surely the biggest potential market. Already quite a lot of UK defence business there.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,996
    AnneJGP said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Thanks for the heads-up. I looked up a news item about his statement. He says, we need to ... ensure that all guidance is in the right place according to that judgment. (Can't post a link, sorry.)

    I've wondered whether his response would be that they need to change the law so that it means what (some) people thought it meant.

    Good morning, everybody

    Edit the to they.
    The level of untruthfullness around all this is deafening. The SC was asked a question about the meaning of one word in one act of parliament, in the context of that act. They did their best to answer it, thus telling parliament what parliament had done. Their answer was entirely rational, though other rational answers were available. That's what happens when parliament fails in its job of passing clear and unambiguous legislation.

    It is convenient for the government and parliament to pretend that the SC had the job not only of telling us what parliament had done, but also setting the policy for today. That is a scandalous betrayal of their unique responsibility.

    Those who prefer a different answer can pass a one clause bill amending the EA 2010 to make it mean something different. Good luck with that in closing down the discussion.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,356

    The Kremlin is in full gear to achieve 🇺🇸 🇷🇺 rapprochement with the aim of marginalizing 🇪🇺🇬🇧 influence and possibilities, particularly but not only related to 🇺🇦. And they undoubtedly have an audience on the other side of the Atlantic as well. @BBCSteveR [Video]

    https://x.com/carlbildt/status/1914615638435287539?

    Yep. The standard Russian approach is to flatter Trump by talking of him and Putin as the great leaders leading the two great powers. They can sort things out together. Don't need to bother with the minnows.

    Detaching the US from Europe had been the dream of Russian leaders for decades. But even they can't have imagined that one day there would be a US President as pliable, gullible, naive, self-regarding and ignorant as Trump.
    The Russians think that they will be elevated by the rapprochement with the US, the Americans don't realise that they will be dragged down by the same.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,991

    The Kremlin is in full gear to achieve 🇺🇸 🇷🇺 rapprochement with the aim of marginalizing 🇪🇺🇬🇧 influence and possibilities, particularly but not only related to 🇺🇦. And they undoubtedly have an audience on the other side of the Atlantic as well. @BBCSteveR [Video]

    https://x.com/carlbildt/status/1914615638435287539?

    Yep. The standard Russian approach is to flatter Trump by talking of him and Putin as the great leaders leading the two great powers. They can sort things out together. Don't need to bother with the minnows.

    Detaching the US from Europe had been the dream of Russian leaders for decades. But even they can't have imagined that one day there would be a US President as pliable, gullible, naive, self-regarding and ignorant as Trump.
    Yet Trump's trade war with China is also detaching Beijing from Moscow.

    The alliance between white nationalists Putin and Trump is not something China is now interested in
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379
    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    They can use a mixed sex toilet or the women’s toilet. It’s not complicated.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Barnesian said:



    This one looks OK to me. The total value of sea fish landings by UK vessels is about £1 billion. We lose a proportion of that for a proportion (perhaps small) of £150 billion.

    There's probably an instrumental aspect to all this. NATO is on its death bed and the UK government doesn't want to be folornly wanking in a hedge while looking at whatever structure succeeds it indulges in an orgy of debt fuelled defence spending.

    Of course there is no certainty it will be EUTO but there is a chance it might be. If it is, the UK would be preferred to be involved from inception rather than stood in a queue making awkward conversation with the likes of Iceland and North Macedonia at a later date when it's fully formed.
    Which is what happened the first time round with Europe, and we spent the next six decades trying to play catch up.

    Leon, who is a better judge of these things, voted for Boris, Brexit, and Starmer.
    I think we can dismiss his opinion in relative safety.
    Can we? I see the Spectator has plagiarised my idea that “democracy is doomed” because we are all getting too dumb - and it is one of the most read articles on the site. So clearly someone admires my insights
    I wish you would read these nonsensical puff pieces by this Thomas guy before you recommend them. Twenty four carat off the top of his head rubbish.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,304
    People will buy any old shit news. I pass no comment on the spirit of these things, but the ‘art’ is ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE, much worse than Winnie and Adolf at their worst. I might even have to accept in this particular case AI could do better.

    https://x.com/veritasbrit/status/1914183195001589837?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,996
    edited 10:26AM
    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    This is an area where angels fear to tread, but I wonder whether the best answer for most situations until and unless the state of the law and its implications are clarified and/or amended, is for any individual in a trans circumstance - and these situations are various, and transitions take time, and outcomes will vary too - to use the facility which is, on objective consideration, the least likely to cause alarm and distress to others who won't know the whole background story.

    But for reasons exhaustively discussed here and everywhere, not all situations are going to be completely smooth and easy.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,282
    edited 10:27AM
    It must be reassuring for the trans community to hear such warm words from the PM at the end of this interview. He’s really got their backs

    https://x.com/jamesesses/status/1914616059979510044?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    They can use a mixed sex toilet or the women’s toilet. It’s not complicated.
    I know transgender lavatory habits are your Mastermind specialist subject, so I bow to your expertise, but are you sure you have this right?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,530
    isam said:

    It must be reassuring for the trans community to hear such warm words from the PM at the end of this interview. He’s really got their backs

    https://x.com/jamesesses/status/1914616059979510044?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Very lawyerly today. The expression on his face says it all. I honestly don't know what he thinks on this matter, but he knows it's a potential shitstorm for him.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,712
    edited 10:31AM

    Nigelb said:

    Trade war is still hotting up.
    And China is refusing US requests to talk.

    China Imposes Controls on Rare Earth Exports… First Target Is South Korea

    “Don’t Export Products Containing Rare Earths to the U.S.” … Korea and Others Face Intensified Pressure

    Transformers Manufacturers Asked to Give Guarantees… Battery and Aerospace Sectors on High Alert
    Warning of “No Transshipment”—Violators Likely to See Rare Earth Supplies Cut Off

    It has been confirmed that the Chinese government sent Korean companies a warning notice stating that it would impose sanctions if they exported products made with Chinese rare earths to U.S. defense contractors. Just as the U.S. has controlled indirect exports of American-made semiconductors to China, China is now actively enforcing “third-country export controls” on the strategic mineral rare earths. Concerns are growing that Korean firms are being forced to choose sides in the U.S.–China struggle for dominance.

    According to industry sources on April 22, transformer manufacturer Company A recently received an official letter from China’s Ministry of Commerce declaring, “You must guarantee that power equipment such as transformers containing Chinese medium rare earths will not be exported to U.S. defense firms or the U.S. military, and bear in mind that any violations may incur sanctions.”

    Although the notice did not specify the exact penalties, industry insiders interpret it to mean that if any indirect exports are uncovered, China will halt shipments of its medium rare earths. Transformer manufacturer Company B is also reported to have received the same notice.

    The government has determined that, in addition to transformer makers, most companies in sectors that import and use Chinese strategic minerals—such as secondary batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace, and medical equipment—have received identical warnings. A government official commented, “It appears that China has begun to implement third-country export controls across all of its strategic minerals.”
    ..

    https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1914613174323884308

    The US is on the wrong end of 20-30 years of Chinese strategic planning.

    Trump is stupid enough to end up in a real war with China.
    In that case we better hope that NATO falls apart quickly we don’t want to be part of a China-USA war as the US won’t be the winners
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,304
    edited 10:37AM

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    They can use a mixed sex toilet or the women’s toilet. It’s not complicated.
    I know transgender lavatory habits are your Mastermind specialist subject, so I bow to your expertise, but are you sure you have this right?
    I’m sure there will be absolutely no problem with people looking like men using women’s toilets.

    ‘Get a move on luv, this sister is burstin’.’


  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373
    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    They can use a mixed sex toilet or the women’s toilet. It’s not complicated.
    I know transgender lavatory habits are your Mastermind specialist subject, so I bow to your expertise, but are you sure you have this right?
    I’ve read the Supreme Court judgement and articles from Dr Michael Forman and Akua Reindorf KC, both experts in the field:

    https://x.com/peter_daly/status/1914384429826425101

    https://x.com/peter_daly/status/1914382215493955636
  • isamisam Posts: 41,282

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,991
    eek said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trade war is still hotting up.
    And China is refusing US requests to talk.

    China Imposes Controls on Rare Earth Exports… First Target Is South Korea

    “Don’t Export Products Containing Rare Earths to the U.S.” … Korea and Others Face Intensified Pressure

    Transformers Manufacturers Asked to Give Guarantees… Battery and Aerospace Sectors on High Alert
    Warning of “No Transshipment”—Violators Likely to See Rare Earth Supplies Cut Off

    It has been confirmed that the Chinese government sent Korean companies a warning notice stating that it would impose sanctions if they exported products made with Chinese rare earths to U.S. defense contractors. Just as the U.S. has controlled indirect exports of American-made semiconductors to China, China is now actively enforcing “third-country export controls” on the strategic mineral rare earths. Concerns are growing that Korean firms are being forced to choose sides in the U.S.–China struggle for dominance.

    According to industry sources on April 22, transformer manufacturer Company A recently received an official letter from China’s Ministry of Commerce declaring, “You must guarantee that power equipment such as transformers containing Chinese medium rare earths will not be exported to U.S. defense firms or the U.S. military, and bear in mind that any violations may incur sanctions.”

    Although the notice did not specify the exact penalties, industry insiders interpret it to mean that if any indirect exports are uncovered, China will halt shipments of its medium rare earths. Transformer manufacturer Company B is also reported to have received the same notice.

    The government has determined that, in addition to transformer makers, most companies in sectors that import and use Chinese strategic minerals—such as secondary batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace, and medical equipment—have received identical warnings. A government official commented, “It appears that China has begun to implement third-country export controls across all of its strategic minerals.”
    ..

    https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1914613174323884308

    The US is on the wrong end of 20-30 years of Chinese strategic planning.

    Trump is stupid enough to end up in a real war with China.
    In that case we better hope that NATO falls apart quickly we don’t want to be part of a China-USA war as the US won’t be the winners
    As long as China doesn't invade the US Europe and Canada could stay neutral, though Russia might support Trump making NATO redundant in that scenario
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 931
    HYUFD said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fishing said:

    Barnesian said:

    Fishing said:

    Euch, is there any group of people worse than the French? Negotiating with us, asking that we give them something in return for them giving something to us? What next? When will this perfidy end?

    The French are the most reliable people in the world.

    They will always be there when they need you.
    As you must know, the French value fishing more than we do.
    We can exploit that. Theory of mind I'm told.
    I'm sure we CAN.

    But one thing we should have learned over the last century, and I saw during several years negotiating with them and others in the EU, is that, while our Foreign Office prioritises "good relations" and "goodwill" with other countries over tangible national interests, we WON'T.

    The only time we got something big and tangible in my lifetime was when Mrs Thatcher stuck her heels in over the rebate, against Foreign Office advice.

    But with the useless Starmer and Lammy in charge, we'll give in in exchange for warm words and nothing tangible and our fishing industry will resume its vertiginous decline.
    Unless Farage becomes PM next time which is certainly possible on current polls
    Whatever Farage wants to do in government, he is going to be greatly hindered by the constellation of chavs, Strasserites, crayon eating dunces and the simply mentally ill from whom he will be forced to people his 'cabinet'.
    Given he would almost certainly fall short of a Reform majority and need Tory confidence and supply half his Cabinet would have to be Tories
    If it's C&S, there wouldn't be Con cabinet members, just like there were no DUP cabinet ministers in the May govt after the 2017 election.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,130

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    On topic: smoked haddock with poached egg and proper crunchy wholemeal toast - lavished with salty butter - is the breakfast of emperors


    I always have it at posh hotels if it’s available

    Great breakfast. My summer lunch alternative with Smoked Haddock is SH with new potatoes crushed with salty butter and pepper, beetroot and horseradish. Perfect flavour mix.
    Mmm. Sounds good. Smoked haddock is lush

    When you have that breakfast and you break the yolk and the golden goodness mixes with the fishy umami and you mop it up with salty crunchy toast. Then a gulp of strong tea?

    Omg

    Sets you up for the whole day but in a brilliant healthy way that a full English does not. A full English weighs you down and you need a nap
    It's Bond's favourite meal of the day.

    "Breakfast is prepared by May, his Scottish housekeeper and she takes it to him on a tray with a copy of the Times. At home his breakfast consists of: Two cups of very strong coffee from De Bry in New Oxford Street brewed in an American Chemex and drunk black without sugar. A brown speckled egg from a French Marans hen boiled for 3 1/3 minutes served in a dark blue egg cup with a gold ring round the top. Two thick slices of wholewheat toast with Jersey butter and the choice of Tiptree “Little Scarlet” strawberry jam, Cooper’s vintage oxford marmalade and Norwegian Heather Honey from Fortnum’s. We also learn that the eggs are provided by a friend of May and that Bond dislikes white eggs. The coffee pot and the silver on the tray are Queen Anne, and the china is Minton, of the same dark blue and gold and white as the egg-cup."

    https://www.thejamesbonddossier.com/books/from-russia-with-love-book/from-russia-with-love-food-and-drink-from-the-novel.htm
    The reason why Bond works so well here is that it goes further than just sex and violence: it's sex, sadism and snobbery, which explains precisely why it's so intoxicating to us Brits.
    It’s such a weird dated snobbery. We’re meant to be impressed that he takes Tiptree jam, and Cooper’s marmalade. Lol

    I believe in one bond book he has steak chips and Liebfraumilch wine

    Of course it was all exotic to impoverished Brits in the postwar era
    What Victoria Coren-Mitchell described as Bond's weird, camp fussiness about everything he eats and drinks.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6WiXmPdd3E&t=16s
    Misplaced snobbery as well, Tiptree thick cut is a better marmalade than Coopers.
    McDonalds have a toasted muffin with Tiptree strawberry jam on their breakfast menu.
    https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/muffin-jam.html
    Just had a McDonald's Toffee Latte. Is it supposed to taste of methylated spirit?
    McDonalds coffee is generally applauded so maybe they just thought meths was better than toffee.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,130
    Sean_F said:

    I'd eat much more fish if I had access to a proper fishmonger. There used to be loads of fish shops - a quick google tells me that there are now only 950 independent fishmongers in the UK, compared with several thousand a few decades ago. Most fish is sold in supermarkets, and it's often bland and tasteless, for whatever reason.

    A good fishmonger’s is worth its weight in gold. Fish is only worth eating if it’s fresh.

    We lost F. Berndes in Enfield, five years ago, although Waitrose still does fresh fish. There is a mobile fish van at the market, once a week, which does wonderful crab and smoked salmon.
    Fresh smoked salmon?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379
    algarkirk said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    This is an area where angels fear to tread, but I wonder whether the best answer for most situations until and unless the state of the law and its implications are clarified and/or amended, is for any individual in a trans circumstance - and these situations are various, and transitions take time, and outcomes will vary too - to use the facility which is, on objective consideration, the least likely to cause alarm and distress to others who won't know the whole background story.

    But for reasons exhaustively discussed here and everywhere, not all situations are going to be completely smooth and easy.
    The law is abundantly clear. There are two sexes and single sex spaces may only be entered by members of one sex. Mixed sex spaces may be used by both. You cannot change your sex.

    If you are trans you are protected under the characteristic of gender reassignment and there are no “stages” of transition. It can range from a simple statement of belief to full surgical intervention - your position on this path does not affect your rights under this protected category. While possession of a GRC does enable you to change some paperwork it does not change your sex, nor offer you additional protection under the Equality Act.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232
    edited 10:47AM

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    They can use a mixed sex toilet or the women’s toilet. It’s not complicated.
    I know transgender lavatory habits are your Mastermind specialist subject, so I bow to your expertise, but are you sure you have this right?
    I’ve read the Supreme Court judgement and articles from Dr Michael Forman and Akua Reindorf KC, both experts in the field:

    https://x.com/peter_daly/status/1914384429826425101

    https://x.com/peter_daly/status/1914382215493955636
    I am not well read in trans issues of any variety, and I genuinely understand that you have availed yourself of a comprehensive set of facts regarding transgender rights ( or otherwise). However as I confirmed earlier I am no expert on this subject, but don't those two X posts support my query?
  • eekeek Posts: 29,712
    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded
  • eekeek Posts: 29,712
    edited 10:45AM

    HYUFD said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fishing said:

    Barnesian said:

    Fishing said:

    Euch, is there any group of people worse than the French? Negotiating with us, asking that we give them something in return for them giving something to us? What next? When will this perfidy end?

    The French are the most reliable people in the world.

    They will always be there when they need you.
    As you must know, the French value fishing more than we do.
    We can exploit that. Theory of mind I'm told.
    I'm sure we CAN.

    But one thing we should have learned over the last century, and I saw during several years negotiating with them and others in the EU, is that, while our Foreign Office prioritises "good relations" and "goodwill" with other countries over tangible national interests, we WON'T.

    The only time we got something big and tangible in my lifetime was when Mrs Thatcher stuck her heels in over the rebate, against Foreign Office advice.

    But with the useless Starmer and Lammy in charge, we'll give in in exchange for warm words and nothing tangible and our fishing industry will resume its vertiginous decline.
    Unless Farage becomes PM next time which is certainly possible on current polls
    Whatever Farage wants to do in government, he is going to be greatly hindered by the constellation of chavs, Strasserites, crayon eating dunces and the simply mentally ill from whom he will be forced to people his 'cabinet'.
    Given he would almost certainly fall short of a Reform majority and need Tory confidence and supply half his Cabinet would have to be Tories
    If it's C&S, there wouldn't be Con cabinet members, just like there were no DUP cabinet ministers in the May govt after the 2017 election.
    For the Tory party to be in a C&S situation with Reform the Tory party would be in such a weak position with so few seats that they might as well merge with Reform there and then
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,304
    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373

    algarkirk said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    This is an area where angels fear to tread, but I wonder whether the best answer for most situations until and unless the state of the law and its implications are clarified and/or amended, is for any individual in a trans circumstance - and these situations are various, and transitions take time, and outcomes will vary too - to use the facility which is, on objective consideration, the least likely to cause alarm and distress to others who won't know the whole background story.

    But for reasons exhaustively discussed here and everywhere, not all situations are going to be completely smooth and easy.
    The law is abundantly clear. There are two sexes and single sex spaces may only be entered by members of one sex. Mixed sex spaces may be used by both. You cannot change your sex.

    If you are trans you are protected under the characteristic of gender reassignment and there are no “stages” of transition. It can range from a simple statement of belief to full surgical intervention - your position on this path does not affect your rights under this protected category. While possession of a GRC does enable you to change some paperwork it does not change your sex, nor offer you additional protection under the Equality Act.
    Actually you are only partially right. The judgement says that trans people can in certain circumstances be excluded from both male and female spaces. In that instance a gender-neutral alternative (like a disabled loo) would need to be available.

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/f89ecc90-d81e-4f92-967b-8b6309cbb65f?shareToken=89a05676716e9d9c97242f0bbde7bbd2
    In fact, the judgment says that the Equality Act allows trans men (biological females) to be excluded from the women’s facilities, and trans women (biological males) to be excluded from the men’s. This might happen if, for example, a trans person looks so much like a person of the opposite biological sex that it would be disruptive to accommodate them in the single-sex service.

    Undoubtedly this creates a double bind for trans people, and lawful solutions that preserve dignity and enable the full participation of trans people in public life must be found. An obvious one is to provide additional mixed-sex spaces alongside single-sex ones.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,348
    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    According to wikipedia: "In 1975 he limited the number of cardinal electors to 120.[26] Though this remains the theoretical limit, all of his successors have exceeded it for short periods of time. "
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,991

    HYUFD said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fishing said:

    Barnesian said:

    Fishing said:

    Euch, is there any group of people worse than the French? Negotiating with us, asking that we give them something in return for them giving something to us? What next? When will this perfidy end?

    The French are the most reliable people in the world.

    They will always be there when they need you.
    As you must know, the French value fishing more than we do.
    We can exploit that. Theory of mind I'm told.
    I'm sure we CAN.

    But one thing we should have learned over the last century, and I saw during several years negotiating with them and others in the EU, is that, while our Foreign Office prioritises "good relations" and "goodwill" with other countries over tangible national interests, we WON'T.

    The only time we got something big and tangible in my lifetime was when Mrs Thatcher stuck her heels in over the rebate, against Foreign Office advice.

    But with the useless Starmer and Lammy in charge, we'll give in in exchange for warm words and nothing tangible and our fishing industry will resume its vertiginous decline.
    Unless Farage becomes PM next time which is certainly possible on current polls
    Whatever Farage wants to do in government, he is going to be greatly hindered by the constellation of chavs, Strasserites, crayon eating dunces and the simply mentally ill from whom he will be forced to people his 'cabinet'.
    Given he would almost certainly fall short of a Reform majority and need Tory confidence and supply half his Cabinet would have to be Tories
    If it's C&S, there wouldn't be Con cabinet members, just like there were no DUP cabinet ministers in the May govt after the 2017 election.
    Given there would be around 150 Tory MPs and around 200 Reform MPs it would almost certainly have to be a formal Tory and Reform coalition government with Farage PM and Kemi DPM
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,474
    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Sounds like a job for Thunderdome.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,348

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Complaint about what? Anyone can use them.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,991
    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    First come first served
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379

    algarkirk said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    This is an area where angels fear to tread, but I wonder whether the best answer for most situations until and unless the state of the law and its implications are clarified and/or amended, is for any individual in a trans circumstance - and these situations are various, and transitions take time, and outcomes will vary too - to use the facility which is, on objective consideration, the least likely to cause alarm and distress to others who won't know the whole background story.

    But for reasons exhaustively discussed here and everywhere, not all situations are going to be completely smooth and easy.
    The law is abundantly clear. There are two sexes and single sex spaces may only be entered by members of one sex. Mixed sex spaces may be used by both. You cannot change your sex.

    If you are trans you are protected under the characteristic of gender reassignment and there are no “stages” of transition. It can range from a simple statement of belief to full surgical intervention - your position on this path does not affect your rights under this protected category. While possession of a GRC does enable you to change some paperwork it does not change your sex, nor offer you additional protection under the Equality Act.
    Actually you are only partially right. The judgement says that trans people can in certain circumstances be excluded from both male and female spaces. In that instance a gender-neutral alternative (like a disabled loo) would need to be available.

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/f89ecc90-d81e-4f92-967b-8b6309cbb65f?shareToken=89a05676716e9d9c97242f0bbde7bbd2
    In fact, the judgment says that the Equality Act allows trans men (biological females) to be excluded from the women’s facilities, and trans women (biological males) to be excluded from the men’s. This might happen if, for example, a trans person looks so much like a person of the opposite biological sex that it would be disruptive to accommodate them in the single-sex service.

    Undoubtedly this creates a double bind for trans people, and lawful solutions that preserve dignity and enable the full participation of trans people in public life must be found. An obvious one is to provide additional mixed-sex spaces alongside single-sex ones.
    I didn’t think we’d got to the “nuance” stage yet!

    But you’re right, the TRAs have potentially made life slightly more difficult for trans people - let’s hope it gets sorted out quickly - but the solution is not to impinge on the rights of women.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,474
    FPT: Hope Mr. NorthWales and his wife both recover quickly.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,507
    edited 10:54AM

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    On topic: smoked haddock with poached egg and proper crunchy wholemeal toast - lavished with salty butter - is the breakfast of emperors


    I always have it at posh hotels if it’s available

    Great breakfast. My summer lunch alternative with Smoked Haddock is SH with new potatoes crushed with salty butter and pepper, beetroot and horseradish. Perfect flavour mix.
    Mmm. Sounds good. Smoked haddock is lush

    When you have that breakfast and you break the yolk and the golden goodness mixes with the fishy umami and you mop it up with salty crunchy toast. Then a gulp of strong tea?

    Omg

    Sets you up for the whole day but in a brilliant healthy way that a full English does not. A full English weighs you down and you need a nap
    It's Bond's favourite meal of the day.

    "Breakfast is prepared by May, his Scottish housekeeper and she takes it to him on a tray with a copy of the Times. At home his breakfast consists of: Two cups of very strong coffee from De Bry in New Oxford Street brewed in an American Chemex and drunk black without sugar. A brown speckled egg from a French Marans hen boiled for 3 1/3 minutes served in a dark blue egg cup with a gold ring round the top. Two thick slices of wholewheat toast with Jersey butter and the choice of Tiptree “Little Scarlet” strawberry jam, Cooper’s vintage oxford marmalade and Norwegian Heather Honey from Fortnum’s. We also learn that the eggs are provided by a friend of May and that Bond dislikes white eggs. The coffee pot and the silver on the tray are Queen Anne, and the china is Minton, of the same dark blue and gold and white as the egg-cup."

    https://www.thejamesbonddossier.com/books/from-russia-with-love-book/from-russia-with-love-food-and-drink-from-the-novel.htm
    The reason why Bond works so well here is that it goes further than just sex and violence: it's sex, sadism and snobbery, which explains precisely why it's so intoxicating to us Brits.
    It’s such a weird dated snobbery. We’re meant to be impressed that he takes Tiptree jam, and Cooper’s marmalade. Lol

    I believe in one bond book he has steak chips and Liebfraumilch wine

    Of course it was all exotic to impoverished Brits in the postwar era
    What Victoria Coren-Mitchell described as Bond's weird, camp fussiness about everything he eats and drinks.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6WiXmPdd3E&t=16s
    Misplaced snobbery as well, Tiptree thick cut is a better marmalade than Coopers.
    McDonalds have a toasted muffin with Tiptree strawberry jam on their breakfast menu.
    https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/muffin-jam.html
    Just had a McDonald's Toffee Latte. Is it supposed to taste of methylated spirit?
    Your first mistake was actually voluntarily entering a McDonald's.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    edited 10:51AM
    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,130

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,304
    edited 10:53AM
    RobD said:

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Complaint about what? Anyone can use them.
    My point was about the way disabled people feel, not whether it’s justified or not.
    We don’t really have to delve deep into this debate to bump up against people’s feelings rather than hard facts.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373

    algarkirk said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    This is an area where angels fear to tread, but I wonder whether the best answer for most situations until and unless the state of the law and its implications are clarified and/or amended, is for any individual in a trans circumstance - and these situations are various, and transitions take time, and outcomes will vary too - to use the facility which is, on objective consideration, the least likely to cause alarm and distress to others who won't know the whole background story.

    But for reasons exhaustively discussed here and everywhere, not all situations are going to be completely smooth and easy.
    The law is abundantly clear. There are two sexes and single sex spaces may only be entered by members of one sex. Mixed sex spaces may be used by both. You cannot change your sex.

    If you are trans you are protected under the characteristic of gender reassignment and there are no “stages” of transition. It can range from a simple statement of belief to full surgical intervention - your position on this path does not affect your rights under this protected category. While possession of a GRC does enable you to change some paperwork it does not change your sex, nor offer you additional protection under the Equality Act.
    Actually you are only partially right. The judgement says that trans people can in certain circumstances be excluded from both male and female spaces. In that instance a gender-neutral alternative (like a disabled loo) would need to be available.

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/f89ecc90-d81e-4f92-967b-8b6309cbb65f?shareToken=89a05676716e9d9c97242f0bbde7bbd2
    In fact, the judgment says that the Equality Act allows trans men (biological females) to be excluded from the women’s facilities, and trans women (biological males) to be excluded from the men’s. This might happen if, for example, a trans person looks so much like a person of the opposite biological sex that it would be disruptive to accommodate them in the single-sex service.

    Undoubtedly this creates a double bind for trans people, and lawful solutions that preserve dignity and enable the full participation of trans people in public life must be found. An obvious one is to provide additional mixed-sex spaces alongside single-sex ones.
    I didn’t think we’d got to the “nuance” stage yet!

    But you’re right, the TRAs have potentially made life slightly more difficult for trans people - let’s hope it gets sorted out quickly - but the solution is not to impinge on the rights of women.
    Indeed.

    Single-sex spaces used by actual women, and mixed-sex spaces that can be used by trans people, or anyone else, is the entirely logical solution.

    Protects the dignity of trans people, protects the safeguarding of women.

    I can't see a reason why anyone but the most zealous extremist would object to that.

    PS in many places nowadays the disabled loos already serve as a multipurpose, gender-neutral space, including eg baby changing tables that might be missing in the single-sex loos. So there's really no reason why that can't be the solution.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    If you'd lifted your dress and shown them your John Thomas you'd have been fine.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,246
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Would having too many cardinals in be a cardinal sin?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
    Yes, we are where we are because males were insisting on going into women's spaces and women's spaces are excluding males by law.

    Disabled toilets are open to everyone, by law. They are not an exclusive space.

    So anyone who objects needs to get over themselves. Safeguarding applies to excluding people from the women's toilets, it does not apply to excluding anyone from the disabled ones.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,302
    It's Day 29 in the Barty-Bobs-Discusses-Toilets House.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,246
    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Would having too many cardinals in be a cardinal sin?
    Somewhat amusingly, there used to be an actual real live Cardinal Sin.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
    Yes, we are where we are because males were insisting on going into women's spaces and women's spaces are excluding males by law.

    Disabled toilets are open to everyone, by law. They are not an exclusive space.

    So anyone who objects needs to get over themselves. Safeguarding applies to excluding people from the women's toilets, it does not apply to excluding anyone from the disabled ones.
    Have you been to a public male lavatory recently? They are all reminiscent of an H block protest. I think we'd all prefer to use the ladies.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,373
    Dura_Ace said:

    It's Day 29 in the Barty-Bobs-Discusses-Toilets House.

    Not sure why I'm getting name-checked, I just got onto the site for the first time today a few minutes ago and joined in an ongoing conversation.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,712
    I see from the Telegraph that Chinese solar panels are now subject to a 3500% tariff

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/22/trump-tariffs-latest-interest-rates-federal-reserve-markets/

    Who still builds them in the USA except for Tesla?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
    Yes, we are where we are because males were insisting on going into women's spaces and women's spaces are excluding males by law.

    Disabled toilets are open to everyone, by law. They are not an exclusive space.

    So anyone who objects needs to get over themselves. Safeguarding applies to excluding people from the women's toilets, it does not apply to excluding anyone from the disabled ones.
    Have you been to a public male lavatory recently? They are all reminiscent of an H block protest. I think we'd all prefer to use the ladies.
    Which would be why ladies don’t want men in their toilets…..
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,304
    Pulpstar said:
    Rod rather than Ron Crosby of blessed Holocaust denying memory presumably?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    eek said:

    I see from the Telegraph that Chinese solar panels are now subject to a 3500% tariff

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/22/trump-tariffs-latest-interest-rates-federal-reserve-markets/

    Who still builds them in the USA except for Tesla?

    Although Trump is producing so much hot air the US can probably manage with wind power for now.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,619

    Dura_Ace said:

    It's Day 29 in the Barty-Bobs-Discusses-Toilets House.

    Not sure why I'm getting name-checked, I just got onto the site for the first time today a few minutes ago and joined in an ongoing conversation.
    Don't take it personally. No-one cares what I post.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,302

    Dura_Ace said:

    It's Day 29 in the Barty-Bobs-Discusses-Toilets House.

    Not sure why I'm getting name-checked, I just got onto the site for the first time today a few minutes ago and joined in an ongoing conversation.
    My nicknames for all of the other major participants in the trans filibuster would get me a perma-ban. Luck of the draw.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,702

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    I have been in wheelchairs at times in my life (nothing permanent, yet; a product of my absolutely safe as houses pastimes) and I did give a few "able bodied" folk a bollocking if I was waiting outside and one emerged.

    That said, they are, it has to be said, usually very, very infrequently used. And might (might - I am not really taking part in this debate) be an okay compromise. They are always separate and include washing areas and whatnot and everyone (must?) have them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    Pulpstar said:
    Inetresting that Francis wasn't picked as a possible although Rod did note the pressure for a Latin American candidate.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,411
    algarkirk said:

    AnneJGP said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Thanks for the heads-up. I looked up a news item about his statement. He says, we need to ... ensure that all guidance is in the right place according to that judgment. (Can't post a link, sorry.)

    I've wondered whether his response would be that they need to change the law so that it means what (some) people thought it meant.

    Good morning, everybody

    Edit the to they.
    The level of untruthfullness around all this is deafening. The SC was asked a question about the meaning of one word in one act of parliament, in the context of that act. They did their best to answer it, thus telling parliament what parliament had done. Their answer was entirely rational, though other rational answers were available. That's what happens when parliament fails in its job of passing clear and unambiguous legislation.

    It is convenient for the government and parliament to pretend that the SC had the job not only of telling us what parliament had done, but also setting the policy for today. That is a scandalous betrayal of their unique responsibility.

    Those who prefer a different answer can pass a one clause bill amending the EA 2010 to make it mean something different. Good luck with that in closing down the discussion.
    It might be taken to the ECHR, I suppose.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,521
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,246

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    With sponsorship to rise money for CAFOD?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,795
    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,236
    Pulpstar said:
    Whilst @RodCrosby had a good track record for prediction, that article did not even mention the winner (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, later Pope Francis). Betting on popes is a nightmare. I tried predicting them once and got nowhere. People will talk about it a lot, then one will be picked, and it may have no resemblance to the discussion at all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,208

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
    Yes, we are where we are because males were insisting on going into women's spaces and women's spaces are excluding males by law.

    Disabled toilets are open to everyone, by law. They are not an exclusive space.

    So anyone who objects needs to get over themselves. Safeguarding applies to excluding people from the women's toilets, it does not apply to excluding anyone from the disabled ones.
    Have you been to a public male lavatory recently? They are all reminiscent of an H block protest. I think we'd all prefer to use the ladies.
    Not quite sure what was going on at Ferrybridge services loos yesterday !
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,106
    edited 11:32AM

    Well done Starmer, fishing is worth feck all, we need to focus on the big issues, I will never forgive Boris Johnson for prioritising fish over financial services when it came to the Brexit deal.

    Starmer close to EU arms deal — at the expense of fishermen

    British firms will be able to bid for the new €150 billion EU defence fund after the UK makes concessions on fishing quotas


    Sir Keir Starmer is close to striking a major trade deal with the EU that would allow British arms companies to sell billions of pounds of weapons to European allies.

    British firms will be able to bid for the new €150 billion EU defence fund as part of Starmer’s reset with the bloc after the UK made significant concessions to Brussels on fishing rights.

    The prime minister will host an EU-UK summit on May 19 in London as he seeks to ease trade barriers with Brussels.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/starmer-close-to-eu-arms-deal-at-the-expense-of-fishermen-fwckp5btr

    Reform to split the anti-EU vote in NE Scotland 2026? There is little SLAB vote left to punish.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,521
    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
  • isamisam Posts: 41,282

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,785
    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    In my opinion, those in transition should have permission to use the disabled facilities.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,777
    edited 11:37AM
    (3/5)

    This is really is very good news on the procurement front. It seems entirely pragmatic to me that Sir Keir should sign such a deal.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,774

    Nigelb said:

    Trade war is still hotting up.
    And China is refusing US requests to talk.

    China Imposes Controls on Rare Earth Exports… First Target Is South Korea

    “Don’t Export Products Containing Rare Earths to the U.S.” … Korea and Others Face Intensified Pressure

    Transformers Manufacturers Asked to Give Guarantees… Battery and Aerospace Sectors on High Alert
    Warning of “No Transshipment”—Violators Likely to See Rare Earth Supplies Cut Off

    It has been confirmed that the Chinese government sent Korean companies a warning notice stating that it would impose sanctions if they exported products made with Chinese rare earths to U.S. defense contractors. Just as the U.S. has controlled indirect exports of American-made semiconductors to China, China is now actively enforcing “third-country export controls” on the strategic mineral rare earths. Concerns are growing that Korean firms are being forced to choose sides in the U.S.–China struggle for dominance.

    According to industry sources on April 22, transformer manufacturer Company A recently received an official letter from China’s Ministry of Commerce declaring, “You must guarantee that power equipment such as transformers containing Chinese medium rare earths will not be exported to U.S. defense firms or the U.S. military, and bear in mind that any violations may incur sanctions.”

    Although the notice did not specify the exact penalties, industry insiders interpret it to mean that if any indirect exports are uncovered, China will halt shipments of its medium rare earths. Transformer manufacturer Company B is also reported to have received the same notice.

    The government has determined that, in addition to transformer makers, most companies in sectors that import and use Chinese strategic minerals—such as secondary batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace, and medical equipment—have received identical warnings. A government official commented, “It appears that China has begun to implement third-country export controls across all of its strategic minerals.”
    ..

    https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1914613174323884308

    The US is on the wrong end of 20-30 years of Chinese strategic planning.

    Trump is stupid enough to end up in a real war with China.
    He is but otoh he isn't up for fighting anybody who can fight back. I'd hope and think the cowardice 'trumps' the stupidity.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,130
    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,521

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,411

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Maybe, but he must have people around him who know that Parliament makes the law.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,785

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,702

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    Dave Allen saw it coming with papal musical chairs, of course:

    https://youtu.be/e6lgklJQuH0?si=oA2rX6W8ESmDLy-z
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,641
    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    How will they cope ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,641
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
    That's how we can tell you're not a lawyer.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    How will they cope ?
    Especially if one feels the election was stole-en.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,379
    Faculty of Advocates on Chapman accusing the Supreme Court of “bigotry, prejudice and hatred”

    In these circumstances, we respectfully request Ms Chapman to reflect on her words, and whether they allow her to properly discharge her responsibilities as Deputy Convenor in line with the impartiality requirements of the Guidance on Committees issued by the Scottish Parliament. As to the former, we suggest that a fulsome and swift apology is warranted. As to the latter, and notwithstanding that the requirements apply only whilst acting in the capacity of Convenor, we suggest that her comments are not compatible with her role as Deputy Convenor, or, arguably, her continued membership of the Committee. In line with our own role, however, we leave that matter to Ms Adam and her colleagues on the Committee. In addition to the suggested apology, and whatever action is taken by Ms Adam or her colleagues relative to Ms Chapman’s position on the Committee, we suggest that, in order to restore credibility in that Committee, Ms Adam should speak out publicly in defence of the Court and of the Rule of Law.

    https://www.advocates.org.uk/news-and-responses/news/2025/apr/faculty-protests-msp-s-attack-on-the-judiciary



  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,521
    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    By hook or by crook...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,702
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
    That's how we can tell you're not a lawyer.
    That's how we can tell that the laws were absurd and uninterpretable.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,774
    edited 11:55AM

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    It's the right answer. The law is more important than what he or anybody else 'thinks'. Also the alternative, a straight yes or no, leads to trouble.

    Answer yes - "Oh. So you're undermining the Supreme Court and the Equality Act 2010 then?"

    Answer no - "Oh. In which case when will you be repealing the Gender Recognition Act 2004?"

    In general we shouldn't conflate nuance with
    slipperiness, or simplicity with clarity. It can be the case but often (as here) it is not.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,641
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    How will they cope ?
    Especially if one feels the election was stole-en.
    That would be a piece of cake.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,562
    The variety of loos and changing areas even asides from any transgender considerations hints at a far more nuanced debate than the one we seems to be having.

    Changing rooms can be male and female cubicles, male and female open areas, or mixed cubicles (as in Center Parcs or some modern leisure centres). As a man and a Dad, who has sometimes taken a young daughter swimming, I feel more comfortable in those mixed cubicled spaces, than changing her - as demanded by the fact I'm an adult male, in an open male changing space.

    Similarly, for loos, there are cafes that have individual mixed loos down a rabbit warren of back corridors that I much prefer to supervising my daughter going in the gents, often where the urinals are more prominently positioned than the cubicles.

    I've also at times supervised daughters in ballet competitions, the make up.is done, but the Dads' provision is poor. You are rightly, excluded from open areas in which girls up to 18 are changing, so the changing you help wiyh is in the 4x2 loo bound space in whatever loo the location has.

    One location has male and female loos in the off limits backstage area and a mixed loo as the only loo accessible to males. When schools were advised against gender neutral loos this was redesignated as a female loo, so the only loo available to men in the school venue is now formally a ladies. But a very good design imo in terms of mixed safety, the sink area open to the corridors and the cubicles still in the open plan space beyond that.

    Fortunately, the ages of my daughters are such that these are diminishing problems.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,495
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    How will they cope ?
    Especially if one feels the election was stole-en.
    That would be a piece of cake.
    More likely it would rely on surplice votes.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
    That's how we can tell you're not a lawyer.
    That's how we can tell that the laws were absurd and uninterpretable.
    Remind me, who wrote them? Starmer or
    St. Boris.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,641
    edited 11:57AM
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Selebian said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    An actual on topic post

    Since 1975 Papal Conclaves can have a maximum of 120 cardinals attending

    But there are currently 135 eligible cardinals so some how or other 15 need to be excluded

    Not quite the case according to this:

    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-there-really-a-limit-on-the-number

    That is to say, the Pope can invite up to 120 to any College meeting, but in the absence of a Pope any qualifying cardinal has the right to attend and vote.

    Some may choose not to, of course.
    Just have 15 rounds of musical chairs.
    Or 134 rounds to simplify and enliven the whole pope-choosing process?
    Televised...
    You just know there'd be some dirty elbow and tripping action...
    It's a Papal Knockout?
    It mitre get nasty.
    How will they cope ?
    Especially if one feels the election was stole-en.
    That would be a piece of cake.
    More likely it would rely on surplice votes.
    They don't make a habit of that.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232

    isam said:

    DM_Andy said:

    (2/5)

    Sir Keir has confirmed a woman is an adult female and the Supreme Court judgement was right. Can we put this issue to bed now?

    Once the law has been properly implemented in organisations, employers and charities:

    https://x.com/headwarriortwm/status/1914605104478429210?

    Until then, no.
    So where, legally, can trans men go to toilet? The disabled loo?
    Yes. Why not?
    I thought that. What would be the problem?
    Disabled people get quite upset when able bodied people use the only disabled loo in the vicinity. I discovered this on a Calmac ferry to Harris when I nipped into one to complete the somewhat complicated task of removing my motorbike waterproofs. Came out to a woman in a wheelchair and her companion staring daggers at me. The companion said she was going to make a complaint as I scuttled off (nothing came of it).
    Tough shit. Not all disabilities are visible anyway.
    Nor all genitals and yet we are where we are.
    Yes, we are where we are because males were insisting on going into women's spaces and women's spaces are excluding males by law.

    Disabled toilets are open to everyone, by law. They are not an exclusive space.

    So anyone who objects needs to get over themselves. Safeguarding applies to excluding people from the women's toilets, it does not apply to excluding anyone from the disabled ones.
    Have you been to a public male lavatory recently? They are all reminiscent of an H block protest. I think we'd all prefer to use the ladies.
    Which would be why ladies don’t want men in their toilets…..
    A fair point Carlotta.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,130
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
    That is everything to do with knowing the law. Everything.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,635
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    Starmer is a lawyer first and politician last if at all. For Keir Starmer KC, if the law says X is Y then that is the last word on the matter, whether it be freebies or trans. His legal mind served him well in ousting Boris because he knew the rules and Boris didn't.
    Both had beers with work colleagues during covidand only one was had up for it. That's surely nothing to do with knowing the law.
    That's how we can tell you're not a lawyer.
    That's how we can tell that the laws were absurd and uninterpretable.
    The laws were different in 2020 and 2021.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,232
    isam said:

    If you want Starmer to answer a question, you have to refer it to the Supreme Court.

    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1914610404002521471

    'A woman is an adult female - the court has made that clear'

    @Keir_Starmer is asked whether he thinks a trans woman is a woman, after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue last week

    He really is the living embodiment of an irritating Harry Enfield character.
    I thought he was the Chris Barrie character Brittas.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,651
    A friend asked whether Pete Hegseth’s behaviour should surprise us, and I thought the answer was no. It was clear when he was nominated that he was entirely unsuitable for the role. I don’t know that anyone predicted the precise incompetence we’ve seen, but it was clear he was not competent.

    This set me thinking as to who the most obviously unsuitable Trump nominations were. Matt Gaetz is clearly number one, so unsuitable that even Trump gave up on pushing the nomination. Then we can make the rest of a top four with Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. Any advance on those picks?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,492
    Paul Krugman: "If you were a foreign investor, would you want to bet on America right now? Would you even want to visit to look at investment prospects, given the risk that you might be imprisoned by ICE because you once sent a text critical of Trump?"
Sign In or Register to comment.