On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
A not insignificant number of whisky drinkers think the peaty taste comes from the water filtering through a Highland bog, or that the fact a pair of Ospreys fish the source proves it has some special quality.
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I used to really enjoy a west coast IPA but not these days. You’re absolutely right. I also find it with some U.K. IPA’s too. I’m glad the craft craze is diminishing. We should end up with a decent set of brewers left.
I once tried a Triple IPA. Never again
Agreed, I find the current trend for the overly hopped IPAs means that they all taste like grapefruit juice to me which is not pleasant.
Harder to find more gentle flavours like those of London Pride and Butcombe in pubs as they all seem to stock beers like “Neck Oil” which are grim and fizzy - I can’t remember IPas being fizzy in the 90s and 00’s.
Find myself having to drink Guinness for lack of beer choice which I drink far too quickly.
As craft beer got more popular, some of the bigger players got bought over by multinationals, such as Beavertown bought by Heineken. This helps the multinationals as craft beer is keg, therefore easier to keep, dearer than real ale, so more profitable, and can be hazy, so may need less effort to produce.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I used to really enjoy a west coast IPA but not these days. You’re absolutely right. I also find it with some U.K. IPA’s too. I’m glad the craft craze is diminishing. We should end up with a decent set of brewers left.
I once tried a Triple IPA. Never again
Agreed, I find the current trend for the overly hopped IPAs means that they all taste like grapefruit juice to me which is not pleasant.
Harder to find more gentle flavours like those of London Pride and Butcombe in pubs as they all seem to stock beers like “Neck Oil” which are grim and fizzy - I can’t remember IPas being fizzy in the 90s and 00’s.
Find myself having to drink Guinness for lack of beer choice which I drink far too quickly.
I was in Brum, looking more than a little grim, at the Birmingham match yesterday and all they had was Cruzcampo, Moretti and Inch cider.
Not great.
Oh for a pint of Davenport's Mild.
Beer at home means Davenport’s, that’s the beer, lots of cheer !
When I was doing my HNC/HND in Brum I used to walk up by the Davenport’s brewery during lunch sometimes. Even pop into the Shakespeare Inn for one
We (the Brum Uni Chem Eng Society) had a brewery visit to Davenport's. Ended with sampling bottles of their extra strong mild. Purely for educational purposes.
Cracking.
I used to like a nice M&B Mild too. Not seen mild on draft anywhere in donkeys years.
Now, for a more pleasant story of cross-border cooperation. Years ago, coats were considerably more expensive in Canada than the US. So Canadians would drive across the border in Washington state to shop for coats at malls. However, if they kept their old coats, they might face legal consequences when they crossed back into Canada. They discarded enough coats in the malls so that the mall owners began providing bins for them. (Presumably, the malls donated the coats to the Salvation Army, or some similar group.)
Why might they have faced legal consequences? Not paying import duty perhaps.
Only spoke to 80 people, perhaps, so totally unscientific, but I met more people planning to vote Green than Tory.
Essentially zero of the discontent with Labour (of which there is a lot!) is being channeled towards the Tory party….
You can get 125/1 on the Tories winning, which is consistent with Bastani's observation.
I suggest the Tories need to attack Reform UK relentlessly if they want to beat them anywhere.
The starting point for a Tory recovery is them deciding what they are for, not what they are against. Then they need to start explaining how Joe and Jane Average benefit from it.
Incessant moaning about modernity is not policy, and anyway that is Reforms bag now.
The contemporary iteration of the tory part is just being AliExpress Fukkers. I have no idea where they go next nor, I suspect, do they. Some brexit contrition and re-engagement on environmental matters might be a start. Or it might make things even worse. Lol.
I am able to bring this site the unique (actually there are zillions of us) insight of a sickened ex-Tory who believes the party became toxic which believed it could out-Reform Reform only to find, as small children in Hartlepool could have told you, that you can never out-extreme the extremes.
I would like, from the Tories, some "Europe is our closest and largest trading partner, therefore..." and some "we understand the trans issue and then [Nick Herbert's excellent piece]" and some "Party of economic stability" and also some "public sector vital for the nation but shouldn't be immune to reform" and then, ofc, naming me President for Life with a free (as I googled it, tyvm) Toyota Century plus driver.
Then I would take a second look.
Yes. A damn good detox. But would the last initiative not risk undoing all the excellent work of the rest?
Sounds like you're a Lib Dem really..😏
And I thought I'd gone below the belt calling someone an idiot.
The objection was rather that your comment was a piece of unjustified bile. Nick wasn't "pearl clutching" - another piece of nonsense from you - he was just objecting to substance free insults.
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
The issue comes when one becomes 'interested' in sex. You find that while some girls do indeed go for the Tyson Fury think-alike, many don't. And indeed don't like such males.
I think, and it is quite well understood isn't it, that there is a huge number of girls who are appalled by the thought of puberty and changing bodies that want to put that off, perhaps for ever and trans is one manifestation of that.
I don't know what the figures are, and I'm not sure if there are any reliable ones, but from watching sport it appears that there are more women who partner with other women than men who partner with other men. Whether that's because that women feel that other women are more likely to be sympathetic to the 'problems' of being a woman, or what I don't know. Does anyone?
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I used to really enjoy a west coast IPA but not these days. You’re absolutely right. I also find it with some U.K. IPA’s too. I’m glad the craft craze is diminishing. We should end up with a decent set of brewers left.
I once tried a Triple IPA. Never again
Agreed, I find the current trend for the overly hopped IPAs means that they all taste like grapefruit juice to me which is not pleasant.
Harder to find more gentle flavours like those of London Pride and Butcombe in pubs as they all seem to stock beers like “Neck Oil” which are grim and fizzy - I can’t remember IPas being fizzy in the 90s and 00’s.
Find myself having to drink Guinness for lack of beer choice which I drink far too quickly.
I was in Brum, looking more than a little grim, at the Birmingham match yesterday and all they had was Cruzcampo, Moretti and Inch cider.
Not great.
Oh for a pint of Davenport's Mild.
Beer at home means Davenport’s, that’s the beer, lots of cheer !
When I was doing my HNC/HND in Brum I used to walk up by the Davenport’s brewery during lunch sometimes. Even pop into the Shakespeare Inn for one
We (the Brum Uni Chem Eng Society) had a brewery visit to Davenport's. Ended with sampling bottles of their extra strong mild. Purely for educational purposes.
From Warwick Chemical Society we did a brewery trip to somewhere in Burton on Trent. Highlight being you paid you ten quid but had a free bar for an hour at the end.
Bladders were not capacious enough and the coach driver refused to stop. Not a great trip home...
Is that the big brewery that is now Coors/Molsons ? I used to work at a car supplier near there. Lovely part of the world. Great beers too.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
Now, for a more pleasant story of cross-border cooperation. Years ago, coats were considerably more expensive in Canada than the US. So Canadians would drive across the border in Washington state to shop for coats at malls. However, if they kept their old coats, they might face legal consequences when they crossed back into Canada. They discarded enough coats in the malls so that the mall owners began providing bins for them. (Presumably, the malls donated the coats to the Salvation Army, or some similar group.)
Why might they have faced legal consequences? Not paying import duty perhaps.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
Govts get the blame. Suspect numbers are so low in part because Lab supporters also feel gloomy thanks to Trump. The saving grace for Labour might be recent memories of Tory incompetence...
The latter simply means unhappy voters will go to Reform, or LibDem/Green, instead of turning to Kemi's lot.
What I find notable about the rise of the Fukkers is how unarsed the pb.com tories are about it as Mrs Badenough drives the tory charabanc off Beach Head and sends their polling to Trussian levels. Even HYUFD seems to be chill with it because apparently KB might get a job as Welsh Secretary in Farage's cabinet.
I suspect they are comfortable with Aunty Nige because Nige promises those gifts they desire but dare not ask for, like sending Johnny Foreigner home, selling off the NHS for tax cuts, reintroducing selective education at aged 11 and (although Nigel isn't on board yet) hanging Lucy Letby.
Albeit many Reform voters think Letby is innocent
How do we know that? I suspect quite a lot of people across the spectrum believe there is doubt in the case, at the least (I am one). But I don't recall a specific survey of voting intentions plus Letby beliefs...
There seems to be a desire to turn the Letby case into a culture war symbol. I come from the point of view that
1) There are questions. 2) Asking and answering such questions is a fundamental part of the justice system 3) There have been many miscarriages of justice in the past. 4) Anyone who tries the "But it will damage the system" argument for not asking questions is an idiot.
What does "Asking and answering such questions" entail? The main case took nearly a year, so plenty of asking and answering questions took place. There was then the second case. Both cases have since gone to multiple appeals. Letby's lawyers have now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission and we await the Commission's response. That's how the justice system works. (There's also been the Thirlwall Inquiry, asking further questions, but outside of the justice system.)
It is very hard to look at all that and claim that questions have not been asked. More questions have been asked in the Letby case than in most cases. I'm struggling to see a deficit in question asking?
Miscarriages of justice do occur. That's why we allow multiple appeals and why the Criminal Cases Review Commission was created. But Letby has been able to make multiple appeals and has now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Do you think something more should be done to avoid miscarriages of justice?
I'm talking about the people who have been going "Found guilty, should be the end of. Questioning the courts bad."
The legal proceedings and appeals are what should happen. We should celebrate them.
@SeanT in his cell in El Salvador would applaud that (All suspects are guilty. Period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect!)
I don’t see many people saying Letby shouldn’t be allowed to appeal. I see far more convinced she’s innocent and who think a year long trial, a second trial and multiple appeals must have missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that.
"missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that" - apart from the fact that the killer chart is not quite what it seems and that some of the evidence given in the trials is obviously suspect (witnesses telling a different story to what they said in emails much closer to the time of the event) are pretty strong reasons to think that all is NOT right with the conviction. People have a tendency to distort their memories. Years ago I became ill with leukemia (around sept 2012). After that people recollected seeing me at a BBQ in early summer 2012 when we had to go home because of illness and they said "yes, he was already ill in June 2012". Except it was my wife that was ill, not me. Historians prefer primary sources, ideally ones written at the time of events, as they are likely untainted by false memories. I loved Lyn Macdonalds Great War histories, which relied heavily on oral accounts as told to her by men and women in their 80's and 90's. Looking back its quite clear how suspect some of this testimony might be.
Not to shoehorn my pet interests into every thread - I am of the opinion that it is entirely likely, possible, probable, even, that those involved institutionally in the Letby case are lying like cheap NAAFI watches and it is hugely in the interests of the NHS to blame a bad actor than admit its many, many institutional failings, but I digress - one of the reasons that "Warfare" is such a good film imo is that, by the filmmakers' own admission, it is based upon the memories of those involved which are imperfect and the subject of disagreement.
In such a way does the film achieve a transcendence of reality and is thereby able to deal with the subject at hand - warfare - in a uniquely insightful way.
If you want a film that transcends reality....try movie 43
Govts get the blame. Suspect numbers are so low in part because Lab supporters also feel gloomy thanks to Trump. The saving grace for Labour might be recent memories of Tory incompetence...
The latter simply means unhappy voters will go to Reform, or LibDem/Green, instead of turning to Kemi's lot.
What I find notable about the rise of the Fukkers is how unarsed the pb.com tories are about it as Mrs Badenough drives the tory charabanc off Beach Head and sends their polling to Trussian levels. Even HYUFD seems to be chill with it because apparently KB might get a job as Welsh Secretary in Farage's cabinet.
I suspect they are comfortable with Aunty Nige because Nige promises those gifts they desire but dare not ask for, like sending Johnny Foreigner home, selling off the NHS for tax cuts, reintroducing selective education at aged 11 and (although Nigel isn't on board yet) hanging Lucy Letby.
Albeit many Reform voters think Letby is innocent
How do we know that? I suspect quite a lot of people across the spectrum believe there is doubt in the case, at the least (I am one). But I don't recall a specific survey of voting intentions plus Letby beliefs...
There seems to be a desire to turn the Letby case into a culture war symbol. I come from the point of view that
1) There are questions. 2) Asking and answering such questions is a fundamental part of the justice system 3) There have been many miscarriages of justice in the past. 4) Anyone who tries the "But it will damage the system" argument for not asking questions is an idiot.
What does "Asking and answering such questions" entail? The main case took nearly a year, so plenty of asking and answering questions took place. There was then the second case. Both cases have since gone to multiple appeals. Letby's lawyers have now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission and we await the Commission's response. That's how the justice system works. (There's also been the Thirlwall Inquiry, asking further questions, but outside of the justice system.)
It is very hard to look at all that and claim that questions have not been asked. More questions have been asked in the Letby case than in most cases. I'm struggling to see a deficit in question asking?
Miscarriages of justice do occur. That's why we allow multiple appeals and why the Criminal Cases Review Commission was created. But Letby has been able to make multiple appeals and has now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Do you think something more should be done to avoid miscarriages of justice?
I'm talking about the people who have been going "Found guilty, should be the end of. Questioning the courts bad."
The legal proceedings and appeals are what should happen. We should celebrate them.
@SeanT in his cell in El Salvador would applaud that (All suspects are guilty. Period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect!)
I don’t see many people saying Letby shouldn’t be allowed to appeal. I see far more convinced she’s innocent and who think a year long trial, a second trial and multiple appeals must have missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that.
"missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that" - apart from the fact that the killer chart is not quite what it seems and that some of the evidence given in the trials is obviously suspect (witnesses telling a different story to what they said in emails much closer to the time of the event) are pretty strong reasons to think that all is NOT right with the conviction. People have a tendency to distort their memories. Years ago I became ill with leukemia (around sept 2012). After that people recollected seeing me at a BBQ in early summer 2012 when we had to go home because of illness and they said "yes, he was already ill in June 2012". Except it was my wife that was ill, not me. Historians prefer primary sources, ideally ones written at the time of events, as they are likely untainted by false memories. I loved Lyn Macdonalds Great War histories, which relied heavily on oral accounts as told to her by men and women in their 80's and 90's. Looking back its quite clear how suspect some of this testimony might be.
Not to shoehorn my pet interests into every thread - I am of the opinion that it is entirely likely, possible, probable, even, that those involved institutionally in the Letby case are lying like cheap NAAFI watches and it is hugely in the interests of the NHS to blame a bad actor than admit its many, many institutional failings, but I digress - one of the reasons that "Warfare" is such a good film imo is that, by the filmmakers' own admission, it is based upon the memories of those involved which are imperfect and the subject of disagreement.
In such a way does the film achieve a transcendence of reality and is thereby able to deal with the subject at hand - warfare - in a uniquely insightful way.
If you want a film that transcends reality....try movie 43
Is that one of those super-boring meta-movies which is making a movie that knows it is a movie that knows that you are watching it make a movie about making a movie?
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
A not insignificant number of whisky drinkers think the peaty taste comes from the water filtering through a Highland bog, or that the fact a pair of Ospreys fish the source proves it has some special quality.
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
Ah, have I got the wrong end of the stick and @Luckyguy1983 the right end. I thought you were challenging my cynicism and as I know little about it I was backing down. I would be interested in some facts. I am rather cynical myself on the importance of the water, but as I am ignorant on the subject and it is a strongly held belief by many I wasn't going to get into an argument over it.
Yes the water is very hard here and I never thought to ask them if that was an issue with the equipment, which was very sparkly. Cleaning is a big issue, but they didn't give a toss about any special water for brewing, although some breweries I've been to seem to rave on about it. I'll have to ask at the Adnams brewery as well, because I can pop in there anytime, and I don't think they have any special source and again the water will be hard there as well.
Really interested in the myths and the science if you can provide. Offline if it is too much info.
The hearing has started for the law firm suing Trump for his executive order banning them from having security clearance to carry out any work relating to government.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described.
But transwomen seem to understand very clearly that they are women but can't identify exactly what it is that makes them so.
Being gay? Attracted to those of the same sex (gender?!). Easy.
Being a woman? Well Supreme Court ruling aside, I don't see why it shouldn't be that you reject and, crucially, don't think that you possess any of the stereotypical behaviour very commonly found in human males. Could you become a loss adjuster in Penge? Of course and I'm sure many people do. But to really exit that male rat race which you believe you are innately not a part of, then that perhaps requires for some people a more strident expression.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
No idea I don't watch it. But I am talking about on the terraces, not in the six yard box.
They are showing a video of Farage being sensible and pragmatic. Surely that just helps him get votes unless it puts people off who want a loon and that portrays him as not being a loon.
Spending as much as $22 for a single Temu item, is that even possible?
I presume this increase is the de minimus rules. Which people who I know in the US who run legit e-commerce sites consistently say is massive exploited by unscrupulous Chinese firms. This is where is Trump was sensible he could actually address a problem, but just overnight changing the rules (and who knows if he changes them tomorrow) isn't the solution.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
Apologies @Luckyguy1983 (not that I was arguing with you) but I misunderstood @Eabhal not you. I thought he was disagreeing with me (maybe I shouldn't always assume that )
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
So your point is that its not they think they are a female in a male body they are just trying to opt out of the male stereotype.....in other words they aren't trans
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
No idea I don't watch it. But I am talking about on the terraces, not in the six yard box.
Point noted. But what happens of the pitch affects what happens on the terraces.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
So your point is that its not they think they are a female in a male body they are just trying to opt out of the male stereotype.....in other words they aren't trans
No. My point is that for them, being a woman is not being all those things which constitute the male stereotype. That, for them is the innate element of what being a woman is.
And stereotypes are stereotypes but they have their root in observable phenomena. For some people, I am saying, just not conforming to those stereotypes or moving to Uist is not the point, they are so not those people that they assert themselves as the opposite and hence what they believe to be a woman. And who's to say they're wrong.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
No idea I don't watch it. But I am talking about on the terraces, not in the six yard box.
Point noted. But what happens of the pitch affects what happens on the terraces.
Not really. Football firms are often not at the match. They use their clubs as tribal conveniences.
They are showing a video of Farage being sensible and pragmatic. Surely that just helps him get votes unless it puts people off who want a loon and that portrays him as not being a loon.
I think Nige was doing the old misery-guts 'the country's screwed! What's the f*cking point?' thing. But defeatism isn't ideal in a politician - people want someone to lead them to the promised land - so Kemi might be onto something here.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
The issue comes when one becomes 'interested' in sex. You find that while some girls do indeed go for the Tyson Fury think-alike, many don't. And indeed don't like such males.
I think, and it is quite well understood isn't it, that there is a huge number of girls who are appalled by the thought of puberty and changing bodies that want to put that off, perhaps for ever and trans is one manifestation of that.
I don't know what the figures are, and I'm not sure if there are any reliable ones, but from watching sport it appears that there are more women who partner with other women than men who partner with other men. Whether that's because that women feel that other women are more likely to be sympathetic to the 'problems' of being a woman, or what I don't know. Does anyone?
Well and only my opinion here....a naked woman is a thing of beauty, a naked male looks like the last chicken in the shop with his dangly bits
Govts get the blame. Suspect numbers are so low in part because Lab supporters also feel gloomy thanks to Trump. The saving grace for Labour might be recent memories of Tory incompetence...
The latter simply means unhappy voters will go to Reform, or LibDem/Green, instead of turning to Kemi's lot.
What I find notable about the rise of the Fukkers is how unarsed the pb.com tories are about it as Mrs Badenough drives the tory charabanc off Beach Head and sends their polling to Trussian levels. Even HYUFD seems to be chill with it because apparently KB might get a job as Welsh Secretary in Farage's cabinet.
I suspect they are comfortable with Aunty Nige because Nige promises those gifts they desire but dare not ask for, like sending Johnny Foreigner home, selling off the NHS for tax cuts, reintroducing selective education at aged 11 and (although Nigel isn't on board yet) hanging Lucy Letby.
Albeit many Reform voters think Letby is innocent
How do we know that? I suspect quite a lot of people across the spectrum believe there is doubt in the case, at the least (I am one). But I don't recall a specific survey of voting intentions plus Letby beliefs...
There seems to be a desire to turn the Letby case into a culture war symbol. I come from the point of view that
1) There are questions. 2) Asking and answering such questions is a fundamental part of the justice system 3) There have been many miscarriages of justice in the past. 4) Anyone who tries the "But it will damage the system" argument for not asking questions is an idiot.
What does "Asking and answering such questions" entail? The main case took nearly a year, so plenty of asking and answering questions took place. There was then the second case. Both cases have since gone to multiple appeals. Letby's lawyers have now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission and we await the Commission's response. That's how the justice system works. (There's also been the Thirlwall Inquiry, asking further questions, but outside of the justice system.)
It is very hard to look at all that and claim that questions have not been asked. More questions have been asked in the Letby case than in most cases. I'm struggling to see a deficit in question asking?
Miscarriages of justice do occur. That's why we allow multiple appeals and why the Criminal Cases Review Commission was created. But Letby has been able to make multiple appeals and has now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Do you think something more should be done to avoid miscarriages of justice?
I'm talking about the people who have been going "Found guilty, should be the end of. Questioning the courts bad."
The legal proceedings and appeals are what should happen. We should celebrate them.
@SeanT in his cell in El Salvador would applaud that (All suspects are guilty. Period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect!)
I don’t see many people saying Letby shouldn’t be allowed to appeal. I see far more convinced she’s innocent and who think a year long trial, a second trial and multiple appeals must have missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that.
"missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that" - apart from the fact that the killer chart is not quite what it seems and that some of the evidence given in the trials is obviously suspect (witnesses telling a different story to what they said in emails much closer to the time of the event) are pretty strong reasons to think that all is NOT right with the conviction. People have a tendency to distort their memories. Years ago I became ill with leukemia (around sept 2012). After that people recollected seeing me at a BBQ in early summer 2012 when we had to go home because of illness and they said "yes, he was already ill in June 2012". Except it was my wife that was ill, not me. Historians prefer primary sources, ideally ones written at the time of events, as they are likely untainted by false memories. I loved Lyn Macdonalds Great War histories, which relied heavily on oral accounts as told to her by men and women in their 80's and 90's. Looking back its quite clear how suspect some of this testimony might be.
Not to shoehorn my pet interests into every thread - I am of the opinion that it is entirely likely, possible, probable, even, that those involved institutionally in the Letby case are lying like cheap NAAFI watches and it is hugely in the interests of the NHS to blame a bad actor than admit its many, many institutional failings, but I digress - one of the reasons that "Warfare" is such a good film imo is that, by the filmmakers' own admission, it is based upon the memories of those involved which are imperfect and the subject of disagreement.
In such a way does the film achieve a transcendence of reality and is thereby able to deal with the subject at hand - warfare - in a uniquely insightful way.
If you want a film that transcends reality....try movie 43
Is that one of those super-boring meta-movies which is making a movie that knows it is a movie that knows that you are watching it make a movie about making a movie?
Insufferably boring.
I dont know I would describe it as that as more than why would these actors do this film.....put it this way the first vignette is kate winslett on a blind date with hugh jackman who when he removes his scarf appears to have a scrotrum dangling from his throat and both trying not to mention it
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
Yes, that’s how I understand it. Based on the import value on the import paperwork.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
Govts get the blame. Suspect numbers are so low in part because Lab supporters also feel gloomy thanks to Trump. The saving grace for Labour might be recent memories of Tory incompetence...
The latter simply means unhappy voters will go to Reform, or LibDem/Green, instead of turning to Kemi's lot.
What I find notable about the rise of the Fukkers is how unarsed the pb.com tories are about it as Mrs Badenough drives the tory charabanc off Beach Head and sends their polling to Trussian levels. Even HYUFD seems to be chill with it because apparently KB might get a job as Welsh Secretary in Farage's cabinet.
I suspect they are comfortable with Aunty Nige because Nige promises those gifts they desire but dare not ask for, like sending Johnny Foreigner home, selling off the NHS for tax cuts, reintroducing selective education at aged 11 and (although Nigel isn't on board yet) hanging Lucy Letby.
Albeit many Reform voters think Letby is innocent
How do we know that? I suspect quite a lot of people across the spectrum believe there is doubt in the case, at the least (I am one). But I don't recall a specific survey of voting intentions plus Letby beliefs...
There seems to be a desire to turn the Letby case into a culture war symbol. I come from the point of view that
1) There are questions. 2) Asking and answering such questions is a fundamental part of the justice system 3) There have been many miscarriages of justice in the past. 4) Anyone who tries the "But it will damage the system" argument for not asking questions is an idiot.
What does "Asking and answering such questions" entail? The main case took nearly a year, so plenty of asking and answering questions took place. There was then the second case. Both cases have since gone to multiple appeals. Letby's lawyers have now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission and we await the Commission's response. That's how the justice system works. (There's also been the Thirlwall Inquiry, asking further questions, but outside of the justice system.)
It is very hard to look at all that and claim that questions have not been asked. More questions have been asked in the Letby case than in most cases. I'm struggling to see a deficit in question asking?
Miscarriages of justice do occur. That's why we allow multiple appeals and why the Criminal Cases Review Commission was created. But Letby has been able to make multiple appeals and has now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Do you think something more should be done to avoid miscarriages of justice?
I'm talking about the people who have been going "Found guilty, should be the end of. Questioning the courts bad."
The legal proceedings and appeals are what should happen. We should celebrate them.
@SeanT in his cell in El Salvador would applaud that (All suspects are guilty. Period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect!)
I don’t see many people saying Letby shouldn’t be allowed to appeal. I see far more convinced she’s innocent and who think a year long trial, a second trial and multiple appeals must have missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that.
"missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that" - apart from the fact that the killer chart is not quite what it seems and that some of the evidence given in the trials is obviously suspect (witnesses telling a different story to what they said in emails much closer to the time of the event) are pretty strong reasons to think that all is NOT right with the conviction. People have a tendency to distort their memories. Years ago I became ill with leukemia (around sept 2012). After that people recollected seeing me at a BBQ in early summer 2012 when we had to go home because of illness and they said "yes, he was already ill in June 2012". Except it was my wife that was ill, not me. Historians prefer primary sources, ideally ones written at the time of events, as they are likely untainted by false memories. I loved Lyn Macdonalds Great War histories, which relied heavily on oral accounts as told to her by men and women in their 80's and 90's. Looking back its quite clear how suspect some of this testimony might be.
Not to shoehorn my pet interests into every thread - I am of the opinion that it is entirely likely, possible, probable, even, that those involved institutionally in the Letby case are lying like cheap NAAFI watches and it is hugely in the interests of the NHS to blame a bad actor than admit its many, many institutional failings, but I digress - one of the reasons that "Warfare" is such a good film imo is that, by the filmmakers' own admission, it is based upon the memories of those involved which are imperfect and the subject of disagreement.
In such a way does the film achieve a transcendence of reality and is thereby able to deal with the subject at hand - warfare - in a uniquely insightful way.
If you want a film that transcends reality....try movie 43
Is that one of those super-boring meta-movies which is making a movie that knows it is a movie that knows that you are watching it make a movie about making a movie?
Insufferably boring.
I dont know I would describe it as that as more than why would these actors do this film.....put it this way the first vignette is kate winslett on a blind date with hugh jackman who when he removes his scarf appears to have a scrotrum dangling from his throat and both trying not to mention it
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
So your point is that its not they think they are a female in a male body they are just trying to opt out of the male stereotype.....in other words they aren't trans
No. My point is that for them, being a woman is not being all those things which constitute the male stereotype. That, for them is the innate element of what being a woman is.
And stereotypes are stereotypes but they have their root in observable phenomena. For some people, I am saying, just not conforming to those stereotypes or moving to Uist is not the point, they are so not those people that they assert themselves as the opposite and hence what they believe to be a woman. And who's to say they're wrong.
Well I don't obey the male stereotypes hences my dispute with Casino the other night when he couldn't believe I didn't value success and status as he did. (I suspect I view success in far different ways being part of the issue). Despite that I don't think I considered becoming a woman would fix it
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
My business accepts cash. My point was that cash is not a solution for general power outages. My shop might be willing to take cash and note down sales on a bit of paper, yours might do, but the vast majority cannot and will not.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
Govts get the blame. Suspect numbers are so low in part because Lab supporters also feel gloomy thanks to Trump. The saving grace for Labour might be recent memories of Tory incompetence...
The latter simply means unhappy voters will go to Reform, or LibDem/Green, instead of turning to Kemi's lot.
What I find notable about the rise of the Fukkers is how unarsed the pb.com tories are about it as Mrs Badenough drives the tory charabanc off Beach Head and sends their polling to Trussian levels. Even HYUFD seems to be chill with it because apparently KB might get a job as Welsh Secretary in Farage's cabinet.
I suspect they are comfortable with Aunty Nige because Nige promises those gifts they desire but dare not ask for, like sending Johnny Foreigner home, selling off the NHS for tax cuts, reintroducing selective education at aged 11 and (although Nigel isn't on board yet) hanging Lucy Letby.
Albeit many Reform voters think Letby is innocent
How do we know that? I suspect quite a lot of people across the spectrum believe there is doubt in the case, at the least (I am one). But I don't recall a specific survey of voting intentions plus Letby beliefs...
There seems to be a desire to turn the Letby case into a culture war symbol. I come from the point of view that
1) There are questions. 2) Asking and answering such questions is a fundamental part of the justice system 3) There have been many miscarriages of justice in the past. 4) Anyone who tries the "But it will damage the system" argument for not asking questions is an idiot.
What does "Asking and answering such questions" entail? The main case took nearly a year, so plenty of asking and answering questions took place. There was then the second case. Both cases have since gone to multiple appeals. Letby's lawyers have now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission and we await the Commission's response. That's how the justice system works. (There's also been the Thirlwall Inquiry, asking further questions, but outside of the justice system.)
It is very hard to look at all that and claim that questions have not been asked. More questions have been asked in the Letby case than in most cases. I'm struggling to see a deficit in question asking?
Miscarriages of justice do occur. That's why we allow multiple appeals and why the Criminal Cases Review Commission was created. But Letby has been able to make multiple appeals and has now gone to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Do you think something more should be done to avoid miscarriages of justice?
I'm talking about the people who have been going "Found guilty, should be the end of. Questioning the courts bad."
The legal proceedings and appeals are what should happen. We should celebrate them.
@SeanT in his cell in El Salvador would applaud that (All suspects are guilty. Period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect!)
I don’t see many people saying Letby shouldn’t be allowed to appeal. I see far more convinced she’s innocent and who think a year long trial, a second trial and multiple appeals must have missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that.
"missed the obvious thing they just thought of that proves that" - apart from the fact that the killer chart is not quite what it seems and that some of the evidence given in the trials is obviously suspect (witnesses telling a different story to what they said in emails much closer to the time of the event) are pretty strong reasons to think that all is NOT right with the conviction. People have a tendency to distort their memories. Years ago I became ill with leukemia (around sept 2012). After that people recollected seeing me at a BBQ in early summer 2012 when we had to go home because of illness and they said "yes, he was already ill in June 2012". Except it was my wife that was ill, not me. Historians prefer primary sources, ideally ones written at the time of events, as they are likely untainted by false memories. I loved Lyn Macdonalds Great War histories, which relied heavily on oral accounts as told to her by men and women in their 80's and 90's. Looking back its quite clear how suspect some of this testimony might be.
Not to shoehorn my pet interests into every thread - I am of the opinion that it is entirely likely, possible, probable, even, that those involved institutionally in the Letby case are lying like cheap NAAFI watches and it is hugely in the interests of the NHS to blame a bad actor than admit its many, many institutional failings, but I digress - one of the reasons that "Warfare" is such a good film imo is that, by the filmmakers' own admission, it is based upon the memories of those involved which are imperfect and the subject of disagreement.
In such a way does the film achieve a transcendence of reality and is thereby able to deal with the subject at hand - warfare - in a uniquely insightful way.
If you want a film that transcends reality....try movie 43
Is that one of those super-boring meta-movies which is making a movie that knows it is a movie that knows that you are watching it make a movie about making a movie?
Insufferably boring.
I dont know I would describe it as that as more than why would these actors do this film.....put it this way the first vignette is kate winslett on a blind date with hugh jackman who when he removes his scarf appears to have a scrotrum dangling from his throat and both trying not to mention it
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
So your point is that its not they think they are a female in a male body they are just trying to opt out of the male stereotype.....in other words they aren't trans
No. My point is that for them, being a woman is not being all those things which constitute the male stereotype. That, for them is the innate element of what being a woman is.
And stereotypes are stereotypes but they have their root in observable phenomena. For some people, I am saying, just not conforming to those stereotypes or moving to Uist is not the point, they are so not those people that they assert themselves as the opposite and hence what they believe to be a woman. And who's to say they're wrong.
Well I don't obey the male stereotypes hences my dispute with Casino the other night when he couldn't believe I didn't value success and status as he did. (I suspect I view success in far different ways being part of the issue). Despite that I don't think I considered becoming a woman would fix it
I think you are being a touch reductive and, more of an outrage, not reading my posts properly.
I am saying what if certain people believed that that stereotypical behaviour was so much not who they are that it clarifies for them that they are a woman and that - super not conforming to "typical" or stereotypical male behaviour, attitude and approach - is precisely what makes someone a woman.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
No idea I don't watch it. But I am talking about on the terraces, not in the six yard box.
Point noted. But what happens of the pitch affects what happens on the terraces.
Not really. Football firms are often not at the match. They use their clubs as tribal conveniences.
Very true. Although in the eighties the coppers and fans, certainly where I went, used to have a ruck most games at the back of the stand.
The non spontaneous violence seems to be pre-arranged at locations well away from the ground.
I like the fact that the Canadian voting areas are called "Ridings", reminiscent, and probably derived from the English (Yorkshire) "Ridings".
We should learn from them and reintroduce ridings in Yorkshire, wapentakes in the rest of the north and hundreds in the south. Even the ancient concepts of county, borough and parish are only hanging on by a thread.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
So your point is that its not they think they are a female in a male body they are just trying to opt out of the male stereotype.....in other words they aren't trans
No. My point is that for them, being a woman is not being all those things which constitute the male stereotype. That, for them is the innate element of what being a woman is.
And stereotypes are stereotypes but they have their root in observable phenomena. For some people, I am saying, just not conforming to those stereotypes or moving to Uist is not the point, they are so not those people that they assert themselves as the opposite and hence what they believe to be a woman. And who's to say they're wrong.
Well I don't obey the male stereotypes hences my dispute with Casino the other night when he couldn't believe I didn't value success and status as he did. (I suspect I view success in far different ways being part of the issue). Despite that I don't think I considered becoming a woman would fix it
I think you are being a touch reductive and, more of an outrage, not reading my posts properly.
I am saying what if certain people believed that that stereotypical behaviour was so much not who they are that it clarifies for them that they are a woman and that - super not conforming to "typical" or stereotypical male behaviour, attitude and approach - is precisely what makes someone a woman.
No think I am reading your posts fine, in my experience though growing up in the 70's and 80's even then most didn't exhibit the typical male stereotype of being a typical jock to pick an american term. Not convinced the male stereotype is not based on about 20%
"Could renewable energy be to blame for huge Spain blackout? How outage struck days after country's grid ran entirely on green power for the first time."
I was in New York for the massive blackout 20 years ago. We were on the 35th floor of a skyscraper. And when we came out the meeting, we discovered all the lights were off and there was no one around. It was freaky.
I used to work with a chap who'd gone out to work in New York during the 1980s. He could not believe how frequent brown-outs were, in the top city of the world's richest country.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
Cask Ale is very very rare in the US.
Prohibition absolutely killed the the beer breweries, the volumes are too big to hide your illegal industry. After the end of prohibition some companies started up again with their original names, but the demand for European beer had more or less disappeared and so it was no longer economic to produce a beer that was x-times more expensive than Budweiser.
The Sam Adams and micro-brewery craze was effectively a recovery from the prohibition problem.
Spending as much as $22 for a single Temu item, is that even possible?
I presume this increase is the de minimus rules. Which people who I know in the US who run legit e-commerce sites consistently say is massive exploited by unscrupulous Chinese firms. This is where is Trump was sensible he could actually address a problem, but just overnight changing the rules (and who knows if he changes them tomorrow) isn't the solution.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
A not insignificant number of whisky drinkers think the peaty taste comes from the water filtering through a Highland bog, or that the fact a pair of Ospreys fish the source proves it has some special quality.
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
That has potential if Brewdog wish to move into whisky.
Find a peat bog with some brush growing on it, introduce a single malt called Bigbrush.
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
My business accepts cash. My point was that cash is not a solution for general power outages. My shop might be willing to take cash and note down sales on a bit of paper, yours might do, but the vast majority cannot and will not.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
Who said anything about carrefour?
Here's the latest from the BBC:
'Supermarkets have shut as their doors all run on electricity and are heavily air conditioned.
"The local grocery store is still open, but it's really full," Cara says, describing a chaotic situation with the store quickly switching to cash as card payments stopped working. Cashiers were using the calculator on their phones to figure out what change to give, she says.'
"Three men and three teens jailed for park murder"
Over a year remanded in custody. Two months from trial to sentencing.
That's not long for a murder trial, and not long for pre-sentence reports.
My genius-level quick fix is to do away with pre-sentence reports and all that malarkey. Pass the sentence, and later worry about mitigation as part of the parole process. So they'd end up serving the same time inside but the bottleneck at the start would be moved to later on.
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
My business accepts cash. My point was that cash is not a solution for general power outages. My shop might be willing to take cash and note down sales on a bit of paper, yours might do, but the vast majority cannot and will not.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
Who said anything about carrefour?
Here's the latest from the BBC:
'Supermarkets have shut as their doors all run on electricity and are heavily air conditioned.
"The local grocery store is still open, but it's really full," Cara says, describing a chaotic situation with the store quickly switching to cash as card payments stopped working. Cashiers were using the calculator on their phones to figure out what change to give, she says.'
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
Yes, that’s how I understand it. Based on the import value on the import paperwork.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
If a shop works on a 100% markup to cover its costs - that $10 item that used to retail for $20 is now $25 and is going to retail for $50 because unless the shop charges full whack it isn’t going to see the 100% markup it needs to cover its costs and make a profit.
Trump’s argument was that business will cover some of the costs but that way lies bankruptcy either quickly or more slowly - because you average shopper isn’t going to spend much more than last month - at best they will spend the same but purchase less
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
Avoiding the question, but is women's football more or less violent that mens? And what about women's rugby?
No idea I don't watch it. But I am talking about on the terraces, not in the six yard box.
Point noted. But what happens of the pitch affects what happens on the terraces.
Not really. Football firms are often not at the match. They use their clubs as tribal conveniences.
Very true. Although in the eighties the coppers and fans, certainly where I went, used to have a ruck most games at the back of the stand.
The non spontaneous violence seems to be pre-arranged at locations well away from the ground.
I like this headline (not read the article yet) because it's the sort of thing that can indeed be correct, and could even be proven so, but such points usually only get brought out when one side is desperate and spinning, or one side is winning and trying to ensure supporters don't get complacent.
'Polls need only be slightly wrong, youth voter turnout need only be slightly higher'
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
A not insignificant number of whisky drinkers think the peaty taste comes from the water filtering through a Highland bog, or that the fact a pair of Ospreys fish the source proves it has some special quality.
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
Hardness of water matters a lot in brewing, but it is possible to make good beer at differing mineral contents, it's just that the style varies. Most breweries use mains water, but often "Burtonise" the water by adding minerals in order to get the optimum out of their malt for bitter and IPA. This is a good summary:
I can certainly vouch for West Midlands water being good for Mild and similar sweeter styles. I used to live around the corner from Banks Brewery, and the Mild from their brewery pub was something to look forward to.
"Three men and three teens jailed for park murder"
Over a year remanded in custody. Two months from trial to sentencing.
That's not long for a murder trial, and not long for pre-sentence reports.
My genius-level quick fix is to do away with pre-sentence reports and all that malarkey. Pass the sentence, and later worry about mitigation as part of the parole process. So they'd end up serving the same time inside but the bottleneck at the start would be moved to later on.
Ok, but only if they're remanded already. In which case, what time does it save?
If not remanded already, and they get a prison sentence which is suspended upon receipt of the pre-sentence report, you've done something irreversible: for example, taking a child away from their parents for a couple of months. Or, worse, the prison suicide of the defendent.
I like the fact that the Canadian voting areas are called "Ridings", reminiscent, and probably derived from the English (Yorkshire) "Ridings".
We should learn from them and reintroduce ridings in Yorkshire, wapentakes in the rest of the north and hundreds in the south. Even the ancient concepts of county, borough and parish are only hanging on by a thread.
I endorse this comment completely, wapentakes is a spectacular word.
Counties are pretty confusing now with historic, ceremonial, and administrative, and they don't align well to communtiies anyway in some cases.
With new mayoral regions we're all set for greater centralisation, we should counter that with bringing back more archaic terms to compensate.
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
My business accepts cash. My point was that cash is not a solution for general power outages. My shop might be willing to take cash and note down sales on a bit of paper, yours might do, but the vast majority cannot and will not.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
Who said anything about carrefour?
Here's the latest from the BBC:
'Supermarkets have shut as their doors all run on electricity and are heavily air conditioned.
"The local grocery store is still open, but it's really full," Cara says, describing a chaotic situation with the store quickly switching to cash as card payments stopped working. Cashiers were using the calculator on their phones to figure out what change to give, she says.'
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
I understand your point, I think. I'm not saying it's completely ridiculous, or impossible - just in my experience, unlikely.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
Of course the problem with the smug "see I told you to use cash" people is that in a general power cut the tills are off anyway. Same with the "how will you charge your car in a power cut" morons who seem to think that fuel pumps and tills at Shell don't use electricity
I saw some chump suggesting the shops make up paper receipts by hand. Imagine Tesco having to do that? And that doesn't deal with stock control, ordering, or logistics knock on effects.
I actually work on a till. Do you? Not every business is Tescos.
I haven't worked a till in a long time, but how do shops do a bill by hand when the prices aren't on the goods and the thing that would tell them the price is the very till that is currently dead? The vast majority of retailers need a working POS system.
And yet the news is full of people in Spain and Portugal queuing to buy things from shops, emptied shelves, people shopping by torchlight etc.
Is it? For every post showing people shopping by torchlight I can see three showing the shops closed
So you are sticking to your original assertion that people who think having some cash in such a situation (and lots of others) might be useful are smug morons?
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
My business accepts cash. My point was that cash is not a solution for general power outages. My shop might be willing to take cash and note down sales on a bit of paper, yours might do, but the vast majority cannot and will not.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
Who said anything about carrefour?
Here's the latest from the BBC:
'Supermarkets have shut as their doors all run on electricity and are heavily air conditioned.
"The local grocery store is still open, but it's really full," Cara says, describing a chaotic situation with the store quickly switching to cash as card payments stopped working. Cashiers were using the calculator on their phones to figure out what change to give, she says.'
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
Yes, that’s how I understand it. Based on the import value on the import paperwork.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
If a shop works on a 100% markup to cover its costs - that $10 item that used to retail for $20 is now $25 and is going to retail for $50 because unless the shop charges full whack it isn’t going to see the 100% markup it needs to cover its costs and make a profit.
Trump’s argument was that business will cover some of the costs but that way lies bankruptcy either quickly or more slowly - because you average shopper isn’t going to spend much more than last month - at best they will spend the same but purchase less
I've seen this argument a few times recently. But why does the margin have to remain the same to make the profit remain the same?
(That fewer items are sold because the price is higher is true, but unrelated surely? Or related but in the other direction: keeping the absolute profit the same rather than the margin would tend slow the decrease in sales...)
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
I like the fact that the Canadian voting areas are called "Ridings", reminiscent, and probably derived from the English (Yorkshire) "Ridings".
We should learn from them and reintroduce ridings in Yorkshire, wapentakes in the rest of the north and hundreds in the south. Even the ancient concepts of county, borough and parish are only hanging on by a thread.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
D'oh.
Mine is a theory. I happen to think it's compelling. I haven't done the scientific study. People are dismissing it which is ofc fair enough, but they are only dismissing it on gut feel.
There is something that make boys and men become (if you are pro) or think they are (if you are anti) women. But no one has satisfactorily answered the Matt Walsh question.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
I think that's fair comment, but I think the lack of regulation may go deeper than you expect.
I think in the USA it is also about local and regional monopolies in food markets, and an absence of local retail outlets. Which is about there not being choice within a reasonable distance.
The physical nature of the USA is that it is very spread out, especially around small towns. But also it is planned around single use districts, which is a sharp contrast to Europe.
As an example, in my small town of 45k people where I am about 1km from the centre in an older suburb, even without approaching the centre I have 7 mini-market grocery type shops within 8-9 minutes' walk. Those range from 3-4 independents to several chains (including decent size Coop and Tesco). Another one has just opened up.
The overwhelming planning policy in the USA would not permit that type of mixed development. That is inappropriate local regulation. And walking is pretty much designed-out everywhere.
Plus I have large outlets of 4 top supermarket chains within less than 10 minutes drive (Morrisons, ASDA, Aldi, Lidl) and enormous Tesco and Sainsbury within 12-15 minutes.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
Far deeper, eh? So he just "knew". And my reasoning is shallow.
Have you ever asked him.
We had very, very long chats about it. We were only teenagers.
I wonder if you would be brave enough to propose 'reasons' why some people are gay?
Matt Walsh asks, and no one has to date given him a satisfactory answer to the question of "what is a woman".
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
I have had a couple of close trans friends (one m-f pre-op, one f-m post-op), and I only really chatted to the former about the transition. Even at that young age he was very sure of his trans nature; it was more the consequences and reaction on people around him that mattered.
I definitely did not chat to trans colleagues about it...
But I would say it is, for my friend, it was innate. Absolutely, 100%. We went to the same uni, and he was very popular with the girls - whilst all the time wanting to transition.
As for your central thesis: how about people who transition later in life, after having had kids? (Wasn't the trans PBer in this situation?) Transitioning *after* most of that toxic masculinity mess affects you.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
Only spoke to 80 people, perhaps, so totally unscientific, but I met more people planning to vote Green than Tory.
Essentially zero of the discontent with Labour (of which there is a lot!) is being channeled towards the Tory party….
You can get 125/1 on the Tories winning, which is consistent with Bastani's observation.
I suggest the Tories need to attack Reform UK relentlessly if they want to beat them anywhere.
The starting point for a Tory recovery is them deciding what they are for, not what they are against. Then they need to start explaining how Joe and Jane Average benefit from it.
Incessant moaning about modernity is not policy, and anyway that is Reforms bag now.
The contemporary iteration of the tory part is just being AliExpress Fukkers. I have no idea where they go next nor, I suspect, do they. Some brexit contrition and re-engagement on environmental matters might be a start. Or it might make things even worse. Lol.
I am able to bring this site the unique (actually there are zillions of us) insight of a sickened ex-Tory who believes the party became toxic which believed it could out-Reform Reform only to find, as small children in Hartlepool could have told you, that you can never out-extreme the extremes.
I would like, from the Tories, some "Europe is our closest and largest trading partner, therefore..." and some "we understand the trans issue and then [Nick Herbert's excellent piece]" and some "Party of economic stability" and also some "public sector vital for the nation but shouldn't be immune to reform" and then, ofc, naming me President for Life with a free (as I googled it, tyvm) Toyota Century plus driver.
Then I would take a second look.
Yes. A damn good detox. But would the last initiative not risk undoing all the excellent work of the rest?
Sounds like you're a Lib Dem really..😏
No, I'd just like to see those Tories wising up.
I'm Labour through and through. Wilson, Castle, Benn, Foot, Smith, Blair, Brown, Miliband, Starmer, Gardiner, it's all good for me.
On the subject of bread: you guys have no idea how lucky you are. Whether it's Germany, France or the UK, your bread is lightyears better than the crap that is sold in every supermarket in the US.
Now, sure, can you get decent bread in the US? Of course. But it's not widely available. Most supermarkets don't have their own bakery in the way Tesco's and Sainsbury's do in the UK.
The disjunct between the affluence of the USA and the shiteness of its food is quite astonishing
I’ve never seen a really good explanation for it
If the USA was a desolate tundra or mainly desert it might make some sense, but it contains much of the most fertile land in the world, and has every possible climate. It is surrounded by magnificent seas, it ranges from frozen Alaska to tropical Florida….
WEIRD
That would mainly be that they don't believe in regulation for the benefit of the public, perhaps?
If I were in the USA I'd have a bread machine, and buy flour once a year when I passed an independent mill.
Lack of regulation is a partial explanation but not enough. There are other things at work: psychosocial, cultural and more
Eg beer. For decades American beer was laughable despite them inheriting an epic beer making tradition from, especially, millions of English and German immigrants. Plus Czechs etc
Then suddenly about 40 years ago something changed, Samuel Adams was a thing, America had a beer revolution, and now they have some of the best beer in the world, marvellous variety, and you can get it everywhere. Even the local gas station will have a very decent craft ipa or lager in the fridge
That was nothing to do with regulation. That was a change in culture and taste
"In 1978, Carter signed H.R. 1337 into law, lifting the federal ban on homebrewing that had been in place since Prohibition. By allowing individuals to brew beer at home, this decision unlocked a world of experimentation and creativity, empowering people to craft unique and flavorful brews on their own terms..." https://thecasualpint.com/cheers-to-jimmy-carter-the-president-who-sparked-a-craft-beer-revolution/
Been wrong at least 3 times today on 3 different topics and it is only lunch time. @Leon is definitely getting worse.
Oh and Cask beer is as rare as hen's teeth in America. It exists but practically impossible to find.
Not quite true. Americans are now making English style craft beers, I met some last year. Indeed they believe we are neglecting our own cask ale tradition
It was actually quite flattering to stand in a foreign country (in a brewery) and hear someone enthuse wildly about England and English beer (“you have the greatest brewing tradition in the world!” Etc)
Americans do brew some excellent beers, and export more and more of them. If I have one trifling complaint it is that they are over-hoppers. I like an intense hoppy flavour as much as the next man, but there is something to be said for the gentle subtlety of British real ale. Not every product has to be the most exciting flavour in the world.
100% this.
The excessive over-hopping of American IPAs makes some of them undrinkable.
I agree - it reminds me of the time wine got over-oaked - however the key word is surely “some”
America now has such a magnificent variety of beers, you can easily find something to suit your subtler British taste
I agree - it is perfectly possible to get stuff that is not mango flavored or over hopped. Sadly, there is a lot of over hopped and/or mango flavored beer out there.
On a parallel note I do wonder about all the hype over the water used to make beer (or come to that spirits, although I know little about spirits).
It seems to be a big thing, yet Surrey Hills Brewery who make excellent beer and have won lots of awards, including Champion Beer (of all types of beer) for Shere Drop use, wait for it, tap water.
You mean they don't use Dasani?
I had to look that up. But no it is Peckham Spring Water.
if you are not a bitter drinker, most bitter these days is Cask and tastes much nicer than the keg stuff we got in the 70s and also not fizzy or cold.
However I am with you when you are really hot and bothered. On our cycling trips it is a fizzy ice cold lager I want.
The right drink for the right occasion. Same with wine. Cold rose in the sun, red with the meal, sweet wine with the pud or cheese.
As Eabhal hints, water source has even less relevancy when the drink is distilled. It needs to be clean and potable. I am not sure there's much else that you can discern from the final taste.
@Luckyguy1983 I'm not sure @Eabhal was suggesting that. If anyone was it was me cheekily suggesting it, although I am not going to argue with anyone about it, because I know it is a strongly held view and he is more qualified than me anyway.
I threw in the fact that my local brewery, which has won many awards and makes various delicious pints using Peckham Spring Water (that is tap water). And I did it just to be provocative.
A not insignificant number of whisky drinkers think the peaty taste comes from the water filtering through a Highland bog, or that the fact a pair of Ospreys fish the source proves it has some special quality.
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
That has potential if Brewdog wish to move into whisky.
Find a peat bog with some brush growing on it, introduce a single malt called Bigbrush.
Only spoke to 80 people, perhaps, so totally unscientific, but I met more people planning to vote Green than Tory.
Essentially zero of the discontent with Labour (of which there is a lot!) is being channeled towards the Tory party….
You can get 125/1 on the Tories winning, which is consistent with Bastani's observation.
I suggest the Tories need to attack Reform UK relentlessly if they want to beat them anywhere.
The starting point for a Tory recovery is them deciding what they are for, not what they are against. Then they need to start explaining how Joe and Jane Average benefit from it.
Incessant moaning about modernity is not policy, and anyway that is Reforms bag now.
The contemporary iteration of the tory part is just being AliExpress Fukkers. I have no idea where they go next nor, I suspect, do they. Some brexit contrition and re-engagement on environmental matters might be a start. Or it might make things even worse. Lol.
I am able to bring this site the unique (actually there are zillions of us) insight of a sickened ex-Tory who believes the party became toxic which believed it could out-Reform Reform only to find, as small children in Hartlepool could have told you, that you can never out-extreme the extremes.
I would like, from the Tories, some "Europe is our closest and largest trading partner, therefore..." and some "we understand the trans issue and then [Nick Herbert's excellent piece]" and some "Party of economic stability" and also some "public sector vital for the nation but shouldn't be immune to reform" and then, ofc, naming me President for Life with a free (as I googled it, tyvm) Toyota Century plus driver.
Then I would take a second look.
Yes. A damn good detox. But would the last initiative not risk undoing all the excellent work of the rest?
Sounds like you're a Lib Dem really..😏
No, I'd just like to see those Tories wising up.
I'm Labour through and through. Wilson, Castle, Benn, Foot, Smith, Blair, Brown, Miliband, Starmer, Gardiner, it's all good for me.
Labour.
Surely you've missed someone vital, nay transcendent, off that list? Accidentally I am sure.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
D'oh.
Mine is a theory. I happen to think it's compelling. I haven't done the scientific study. People are dismissing it which is ofc fair enough, but they are only dismissing it on gut feel.
There is something that make boys and men become (if you are pro) or think they are (if you are anti) women. But no one has satisfactorily answered the Matt Walsh question.
I am attempting to.
What's your version.
I am merely saying I think your theory is like the theory about phlogiston....it bears no relation to the real world
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
Yes, that’s how I understand it. Based on the import value on the import paperwork.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
If a shop works on a 100% markup to cover its costs - that $10 item that used to retail for $20 is now $25 and is going to retail for $50 because unless the shop charges full whack it isn’t going to see the 100% markup it needs to cover its costs and make a profit.
Trump’s argument was that business will cover some of the costs but that way lies bankruptcy either quickly or more slowly - because you average shopper isn’t going to spend much more than last month - at best they will spend the same but purchase less
I've seen this argument a few times recently. But why does the margin have to remain the same to make the profit remain the same?
(That fewer items are sold because the price is higher is true, but unrelated surely? Or related but in the other direction: keeping the absolute profit the same rather than the margin would tend slow the decrease in sales...)
Depends. Supermarkets generally operate on wafer thin margins (0-3% often). But they make a ton of money because volume. Lamborghini operates, I imagine, on enormous margins and they make a ton of money (actually no idea if they are profitable) because volume.
Depends on the situation. All a margin means is providing your required IRR.
"Three men and three teens jailed for park murder"
Over a year remanded in custody. Two months from trial to sentencing.
That's not long for a murder trial, and not long for pre-sentence reports.
My genius-level quick fix is to do away with pre-sentence reports and all that malarkey. Pass the sentence, and later worry about mitigation as part of the parole process. So they'd end up serving the same time inside but the bottleneck at the start would be moved to later on.
No chance. A cardinal rule of cost reduction is get it right first time.
One of the things a pre-sentencing report tells you is whether someone actually needs to be in prison.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
Not really as now she just acts like the same, just now she beats up women
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
D'oh.
Mine is a theory. I happen to think it's compelling. I haven't done the scientific study. People are dismissing it which is ofc fair enough, but they are only dismissing it on gut feel.
There is something that make boys and men become (if you are pro) or think they are (if you are anti) women. But no one has satisfactorily answered the Matt Walsh question.
I am attempting to.
What's your version.
I am merely saying I think your theory is like the theory about phlogiston....it bears no relation to the real world
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
D'oh.
Mine is a theory. I happen to think it's compelling. I haven't done the scientific study. People are dismissing it which is ofc fair enough, but they are only dismissing it on gut feel.
There is something that make boys and men become (if you are pro) or think they are (if you are anti) women. But no one has satisfactorily answered the Matt Walsh question.
I am attempting to.
What's your version.
I am merely saying I think your theory is like the theory about phlogiston....it bears no relation to the real world
With a sample, for you, of one.
What is your answer to Matt Walsh.
As is your and I have no idea who matt walsh is nor do I really care. Its a stupid theory postulated by stupid people
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
Not really as now she just acts like the same, just now she beats up women
Also sounds like someone you shouldn't be a friend of.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
My question is - how does someone born male know what it is like to be a female? And vice versa?
I've no idea what it is like to be anyone else, never mind someone of the opposite sex.
I could certainly see that society expects certain things, but that's not innate.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
I understand your point, I think. I'm not saying it's completely ridiculous, or impossible - just in my experience, unlikely.
Yes, the Trans-folk of my acquaintance are certainly not doing it for an easy life.
I think there is something in the rigidity of perceived gender roles, but it is a minor rather than major factor. Often it is exhibited in how Trans-folk express their preferred gender, with Transwomen favouring skirts over trousers, bright rather than subdued colours and brightly coloured lipstick*, and Trans-men favouring leather jackets, short hair and facial hair. Or possibly its just the ones I notice, with the more androgenous dressers passing un-noticed.
* I had a Trans patient once who was experiencing relationship difficulties with their girlfriend, but with counselling it turned out that the girlfriend didn't object so much to the cross-dressing as the appalling dress sense and poor ability with make up. Once the Trans patient bought some better suited clothing they got on much better.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
Not really as now she just acts like the same, just now she beats up women
Also sounds like someone you shouldn't be a friend of.
No we aren't anymore when she continued her behaviour towards women, not my only trans friend but becoming a woman didn't change her behaviour
If the retail price of the dress is $22 then the import price will be far less than that.
I understood the tariff to be on the import price rather than the retail price. Am I wrong? It probably didn't cost more than a couple of bucks to make and deliver the dress CIF to a US port of your choice.
Yes, that’s how I understand it. Based on the import value on the import paperwork.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
If a shop works on a 100% markup to cover its costs - that $10 item that used to retail for $20 is now $25 and is going to retail for $50 because unless the shop charges full whack it isn’t going to see the 100% markup it needs to cover its costs and make a profit.
Trump’s argument was that business will cover some of the costs but that way lies bankruptcy either quickly or more slowly - because you average shopper isn’t going to spend much more than last month - at best they will spend the same but purchase less
I've seen this argument a few times recently. But why does the margin have to remain the same to make the profit remain the same?
(That fewer items are sold because the price is higher is true, but unrelated surely? Or related but in the other direction: keeping the absolute profit the same rather than the margin would tend slow the decrease in sales...)
Also the businesses fixed costs won’t change. Or will only change periodically, such as wages, local council taxes and so on.
In the example in the $10 gap between buying and selling cost will cover a variety of adders the shop needs including profit. But of the cost of that increases to $25 a lot of their costs they add to it won’t increase. They aren’t suddenly going to pay more wages for example. Their utilities bill won’t go up as a consequence. The rent won’t. They will, assuming they pay for goods in 30 days, have additional cost of cash affecting cash flow to be covered.
So I’m not sure, profiteering aside, why price would double when costs wouldn’t.
btw as we haven't had enough, or indeed any loo or trans talk today I thought I would share my insights as to what and why (some, many, most) trans people are trans. Trigger Warning: this may involve some stereotypes but bear with me.
MTF first (not unreasonable to think that FTM might "just" be the obverse of this):
Let's say you are a biological male. From a very early age you realise not only that the world is competitive, but that it is uniquely competitive from a male perspective. Not only that but it is nasty and brutish and the first manifestation of this often comes at school where violence can be a go-to method of asserting oneself, creating hierarchies, settling disputes over sherbet dabs and what have you. And it doesn't really let up. As you progress to and through the teens into youthdom and early adulthood the competitive world gets no easier and, critically, no less rough. The concept of "macho" begins to manifest itself and although not easily definable it includes elements such as being faster, stronger, competitive, fighting, fearlessness, and bravado (incomplete list).
But you are a gentle soul. You don't like all that and believe it is absurd that anyone could or should be judged on such terms. What does it matter if that bloke looked at your pint, or called you a pussy, or in other ways tried to assert themselves over you. It doesn't mean anything to you and you'd rather avoid all that. You'd rather opt out of that set of expectations and stereotypes and the pressure of having to "man up" all the time.
And one of the ways (there are several) that you could do this, that you could simply avoid those pressures and obligations to be "a man" are to say that, well, you are not a man. You would rather live your life where you walk into a pub and no one is eyeing you up, and you don't have to worry if you have violated some code or behavioural mode or expectation or are wearing the wrong clothes (I appreciate the irony here for MTF trans people). You just live your life free of that stuff. So you declare you are a woman. And all of a sudden you don't have to worry about that any more. You now have no such pressure. You can just jettison that side of life. You are free.
Now, of course, you will have any number of other challenges to navigate in your chosen existence mode, and for sure there are plenty of violent, competitive biological women, but that seems to me to be a likely reason why biological men might say they want to be women.
Your welcome.
All I can say is that you're way off-base with my schoolfriend, who was trans at the time, and indeed had the op a couple of decades ago. For him, it was far deeper than the somewhat shallow reasoning you give.
But I'd also add that it's unlikely to be just one singular reason for all m-t-f trans people, and might well be a whole matter of 'reasons'.
And why would someone so avoidant decide to put themselves in such a vulnerable position as to be transgender? that is inviting societal pressure not escaping it.
Its more likely they become light house keepers or database administrators.
Yes, from my direct experience, Topping's theory seems implausible.
This says that there is no such thing as masculinity, or machismo, or bravado or those other things I described...
No, it's saying that the trans kids I came across when my son was in school all suffered the same kind of social pressures - severe bullying in some cases, in others family rejection (a couple are still completely estranged) - that your theory that it's some sort of escape from social pressures just seems highly unlikely.
From what my daughters have told me compared to my son I think the social pressures on girls are generally far more extreme for most
I don't disagree; I also have a daughter. My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
I didn't say there weren't pressures and specific pressures on young people. Plus it is perfectly possible for people not to "become" trans but realise they are trans.
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Sorry I have to still disagree with that idea, I don't believe it for a moment
How would you know.
How would you?
I have a trans friend I have known for 30 years the first 20 years they were a he and the very epitome of toxic masculinity....ex squaddie....goaded other guys into gut punching competitions in pubs. Constantly being the hard man. Not sounding like your example of someone escaping toxic masculinity
Exactly sounding like my example of someone escaping toxic masculinity.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
My question is - how does someone born male know what it is like to be a female? And vice versa?
I've no idea what it is like to be anyone else, never mind someone of the opposite sex.
I could certainly see that society expects certain things, but that's not innate.
Is the critical question.
Hence my theory. People know what they are and might be alienated by it so embrace what they think is the opposite of that. See young girls and puberty.
Comments
The hardness of the water has a big impact though, primarily on maintenance. Not an issue in Scotland but I guess a big deal round your patch.
Eloise Alanna reporting from Montreal"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cr5d13e4r2rt
I used to like a nice M&B Mild too. Not seen mild on draft anywhere in donkeys years.
Nick wasn't "pearl clutching" - another piece of nonsense from you - he was just objecting to substance free insults.
Whether that's because that women feel that other women are more likely to be sympathetic to the 'problems' of being a woman, or what I don't know. Does anyone?
If it is an innate feeling and is like being gay, ie you "are" and you know it, then why wouldn't or couldn't the answer to that question be that you don't feel or want to be machismo and hence that feeling, that approach to life is what makes someone a woman.
Woefully inadequate as that is (because that calls into question all kinds of stereotypes about wearing pink and fluffy dog tails), but men are more violent than women, generally, and there is a what I would say uniquely let's call it toxic atmosphere usually only found amongst men (look at the footie for an example) and that is something that is observed and has been observed, and so maybe being a woman is related to an approach that rejects this kind of stereotypical masculine approach.
How would you answer the question.
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1916843747989430476
Insufferably boring.
Yes the water is very hard here and I never thought to ask them if that was an issue with the equipment, which was very sparkly. Cleaning is a big issue, but they didn't give a toss about any special water for brewing, although some breweries I've been to seem to rave on about it. I'll have to ask at the Adnams brewery as well, because I can pop in there anytime, and I don't think they have any special source and again the water will be hard there as well.
Really interested in the myths and the science if you can provide. Offline if it is too much info.
From the thread here, the government's counsel seems to be getting a drubbing.
https://x.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1916865777543598466
But transwomen seem to understand very clearly that they are women but can't identify exactly what it is that makes them so.
Being gay? Attracted to those of the same sex (gender?!). Easy.
Being a woman? Well Supreme Court ruling aside, I don't see why it shouldn't be that you reject and, crucially, don't think that you possess any of the stereotypical behaviour very commonly found in human males. Could you become a loss adjuster in Penge? Of course and I'm sure many people do. But to really exit that male rat race which you believe you are innately not a part of, then that perhaps requires for some people a more strident expression.
Otherwise why are people trans.
They are showing a video of Farage being sensible and pragmatic. Surely that just helps him get votes unless it puts people off who want a loon and that portrays him as not being a loon.
I presume this increase is the de minimus rules. Which people who I know in the US who run legit e-commerce sites consistently say is massive exploited by unscrupulous Chinese firms. This is where is Trump was sensible he could actually address a problem, but just overnight changing the rules (and who knows if he changes them tomorrow) isn't the solution.
In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But it remains a fact that plenty of businesses can and do continue to accept cash when payments systems are down for whatever reason.
And stereotypes are stereotypes but they have their root in observable phenomena. For some people, I am saying, just not conforming to those stereotypes or moving to Uist is not the point, they are so not those people that they assert themselves as the opposite and hence what they believe to be a woman. And who's to say they're wrong.
The retail price then has all of the local cost drivers added to it as well as the profit. For example if inco terms are CIF to port then the cost of onward delivery to the warehouse will need to be covered and not be covered by tariffs.
I suspect a few companies will see this as an opportunity to gouge prices.
No power to the till means no scanning means no stock control means cash and stock mismatch nightmare means sorry we're closed. Which is what most outlets have been without power.
The "smug gits" are the people trying to insist that cash means you still get to shop in Carrefour with no power. Which we both know is nonsense.
I am saying what if certain people believed that that stereotypical behaviour was so much not who they are that it clarifies for them that they are a woman and that - super not conforming to "typical" or stereotypical male behaviour, attitude and approach - is precisely what makes someone a woman.
The non spontaneous violence seems to be pre-arranged at locations well away from the ground.
The Sam Adams and micro-brewery craze was effectively a recovery from the prohibition problem.
As here:
https://x.com/SocialPowerOne1/status/1916684403847139473
My son would laugh at you if you told him it was why he "became trans", though.
Find a peat bog with some brush growing on it, introduce a single malt called Bigbrush.
Right on brand.
Here's the latest from the BBC:
'Supermarkets have shut as their doors all run on electricity and are heavily air conditioned.
"The local grocery store is still open, but it's really full," Cara says, describing a chaotic situation with the store quickly switching to cash as card payments stopped working. Cashiers were using the calculator on their phones to figure out what change to give, she says.'
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c9wpq8xrvd9t
If you want to buy anything, you'd better have cash, or hope someone accepts an IOU (or cheques).
Also, in my experience the people paying by cash aren't the smug ones.
The Army made a tank it doesn’t need and can’t use. Now it’s figuring out what to do with it.
The M10 Booker busted its requirements from the beginning. It’s a case study in how Army procurement wants to change.
https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2025/04/army-made-tank-it-doesnt-need-and-cant-use-now-its-figuring-out-what-do-it/404877/
My point was that being exposed to (for some boys or men) that let's call it toxic masculinity can be the catalyst for them realising that they are so far removed from that that they must be the most opposite you can get from being a man, and that is to be a woman.
Trump’s argument was that business will cover some of the costs but that way lies bankruptcy either quickly or more slowly - because you average shopper isn’t going to spend much more than last month - at best they will spend the same but purchase less
'Polls need only be slightly wrong, youth voter turnout need only be slightly higher'
How the Conservatives could still win this thing
https://nitter.poast.org/nationalpost/status/1916851877339111781#m
Jobs - leaving Las Vegas.
https://x.com/bonkdacarnivore/status/1916670135789576431?s=61
https://www.beerdaybritain.co.uk/how-to-brew-beer/water/#:~:text=Hard water with high levels,is used to make Stout.
I can certainly vouch for West Midlands water being good for Mild and similar sweeter styles. I used to live around the corner from Banks Brewery, and the Mild from their brewery pub was something to look forward to.
If not remanded already, and they get a prison sentence which is suspended upon receipt of the pre-sentence report, you've done something irreversible: for example, taking a child away from their parents for a couple of months. Or, worse, the prison suicide of the defendent.
Counties are pretty confusing now with historic, ceremonial, and administrative, and they don't align well to communtiies anyway in some cases.
With new mayoral regions we're all set for greater centralisation, we should counter that with bringing back more archaic terms to compensate.
https://www.bbk.bund.de/EN/Prepare-for-disasters/Personal-Preparedness/Stockpiling/stockpiling_node.html
Lots of people do this.
I'm not saying it's completely ridiculous, or impossible - just in my experience, unlikely.
(That fewer items are sold because the price is higher is true, but unrelated surely? Or related but in the other direction: keeping the absolute profit the same rather than the margin would tend slow the decrease in sales...)
Mine is a theory. I happen to think it's compelling. I haven't done the scientific study. People are dismissing it which is ofc fair enough, but they are only dismissing it on gut feel.
There is something that make boys and men become (if you are pro) or think they are (if you are anti) women. But no one has satisfactorily answered the Matt Walsh question.
I am attempting to.
What's your version.
I think in the USA it is also about local and regional monopolies in food markets, and an absence of local retail outlets. Which is about there not being choice within a reasonable distance.
The physical nature of the USA is that it is very spread out, especially around small towns. But also it is planned around single use districts, which is a sharp contrast to Europe.
As an example, in my small town of 45k people where I am about 1km from the centre in an older suburb, even without approaching the centre I have 7 mini-market grocery type shops within 8-9 minutes' walk. Those range from 3-4 independents to several chains (including decent size Coop and Tesco). Another one has just opened up.
The overwhelming planning policy in the USA would not permit that type of mixed development. That is inappropriate local regulation. And walking is pretty much designed-out everywhere.
Plus I have large outlets of 4 top supermarket chains within less than 10 minutes drive (Morrisons, ASDA, Aldi, Lidl) and enormous Tesco and Sainsbury within 12-15 minutes.
I definitely did not chat to trans colleagues about it...
But I would say it is, for my friend, it was innate. Absolutely, 100%. We went to the same uni, and he was very popular with the girls - whilst all the time wanting to transition.
As for your central thesis: how about people who transition later in life, after having had kids? (Wasn't the trans PBer in this situation?) Transitioning *after* most of that toxic masculinity mess affects you.
See also: US preachers railing against homosexuality who....
I'm Labour through and through. Wilson, Castle, Benn, Foot, Smith, Blair, Brown, Miliband, Starmer, Gardiner, it's all good for me.
Labour.
Bogbrush.
Depends on the situation. All a margin means is providing your required IRR.
One of the things a pre-sentencing report tells you is whether someone actually needs to be in prison.
First with the news?
What is your answer to Matt Walsh.
I've no idea what it is like to be anyone else, never mind someone of the opposite sex.
I could certainly see that society expects certain things, but that's not innate.
I think there is something in the rigidity of perceived gender roles, but it is a minor rather than major factor. Often it is exhibited in how Trans-folk express their preferred gender, with Transwomen favouring skirts over trousers, bright rather than subdued colours and brightly coloured lipstick*, and Trans-men favouring leather jackets, short hair and facial hair. Or possibly its just the ones I notice, with the more androgenous dressers passing un-noticed.
* I had a Trans patient once who was experiencing relationship difficulties with their girlfriend, but with counselling it turned out that the girlfriend didn't object so much to the cross-dressing as the appalling dress sense and poor ability with make up. Once the Trans patient bought some better suited clothing they got on much better.
In the example in the $10 gap between buying and selling cost will cover a variety of adders the shop needs including profit. But of the cost of that increases to $25 a lot of their costs they add to it won’t increase. They aren’t suddenly going to pay more wages for example. Their utilities bill won’t go up as a consequence. The rent won’t. They will, assuming they pay for goods in 30 days, have additional cost of cash affecting cash flow to be covered.
So I’m not sure, profiteering aside, why price would double when costs wouldn’t.
Hence my theory. People know what they are and might be alienated by it so embrace what they think is the opposite of that. See young girls and puberty.