I just laid Rupert Lowe to be next PM at 29/1 on Betfair. I honestly couldn't believe what I was seeing. Surely the true odds should be a million to one?
It's a bit like David Miliband, who wasn't even an MP, was favourite to be next Labour leader and in the top five to be next PM.
There's some really dumb/wishcasting punters out there.
There must be!
Lowe is the same price as Boris. Obviously Johnson isn't an MP, but if he did become one, he would likely also be LotO, and more chance of being PM than Badenoch now, so I guess that has to be a factor. I can't see that either though
But Lowe? I just can't believe anyone could think he was a 3% chance of next PM. It's almost impossible
I have a theory.
Betfair puts those bets into the system, because people like you will take them as you - correctly - ajudge that the right price for Lowe is probably 1,000 to 1.
But here's the thing. You've now trapped some of your Betfair balance. If you keep your bet for two years, you will have made 3%. But Betfair will have made 7% on the interest, plus taken a small chunk of your winnings.
I just laid Rupert Lowe to be next PM at 29/1 on Betfair. I honestly couldn't believe what I was seeing. Surely the true odds should be a million to one?
It's a bit like David Miliband, who wasn't even an MP, was favourite to be next Labour leader and in the top five to be next PM.
There's some really dumb/wishcasting punters out there.
There must be!
Lowe is the same price as Boris. Obviously Johnson isn't an MP, but if he did become one, he would likely also be LotO, and more chance of being PM than Badenoch now, so I guess that has to be a factor. I can't see that either though
But Lowe? I just can't believe anyone could think he was a 3% chance of next PM. It's almost impossible
I have a theory.
Betfair puts those bets into the system, because people like you will take them as you - correctly - ajudge that the right price for Lowe is probably 1,000 to 1.
But here's the thing. You've now trapped some of your Betfair balance. If you keep your bet for two years, you will have made 3%. But Betfair will have made 7% on the interest, plus taken a small chunk of your winnings.
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
It is very good, though I’ve no idea how people could endure those banquets, in full evening dress, in the Sicilian heat, without air conditioning.
Yes! The insane dresses and high starched collars - like it’s London in March
But my word Sicily must have been gorgeous back then. When Palermo was still the golden shell - surrounded by citrus groves. When the coast was utterly unspoiled and the baroque towns glowed in the twilight
Also I’ve decided I want to be known in real life, henceforth, as THE FALCON
When I sweep into the Edinboro Castle in Camden for a drink I want the whole pub to fall respectfully silent, until a quietly awed girlish voice says in a whisper
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
I imagine that rape is a crime with a huge variability in reporting - probability of getting a conviction, attitudes to you as complainant, etc. Compared with, say, burglary, I'd regard all statistics with caution, and start from the assumption of under-reporting.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
But most women aren’t staying single waiting for the unattainable man. The vast majority of people find partners, they settle, some get lucky and punch up. And 90% of men who are not “Alpha males” do not have to stay single.
There are huge swathes of women who hate “alpha males”, especially when both men and women grow up. For the vast majority of people they fall into a relationship from a random start or they find someone where it works and that’s great. It’s not some crazy reality tv programme where only the top gorilla gets the mates and everyone else just has to accept a lifetime of lonely wanking.
People are complicated, they don’t just want the absolute top because the top earner isn’t necessarily the best looking who isn’t necessarily the funniest who isn’t necessarily the most intelligent who might just be the shortest who happens to have the best eyes but doesn’t have as nice colour skin as the guy who is the top earner.
We all fancy different people with different skills, personalities, attitudes and chemistry. It’s not a simple competition otherwise I’d have all your wives right now.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
You're mistaking what people say they want for what they ultimately do. If you'd asked me when I was single I would have said I wanted a ripped blond husband with tonnes of money. The man I married is (with no insult intended) none of those things. As soon as I met him none of that mattered because I was completely in love. He's told me that I was a foot shorter than his ideal but we celebrated our tenth anniversary this year.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
That statistic is clearly bollocks. The vast majority of non-alpha* males have long term successful relationships, including both you** and me.
*I don't accept the entire classification. We are not baboons and are social relationships are much more complicated.
** this is a compliment. I have never encountered anyone who self describes as "alpha male" who wasn't an arrogant arsehole.
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
When I was a pretentious teenager into Eur-roh-peee-an cin-eh-ma, I went thru a Fellini/Visconti/Fassbinder/Almodovar period. It would have been good if I had the money, time and smarts to understand them, but I didn't and the need to make a living interrupted - I don't work in STEM by accident. I remember watching the Burt Lancaster version of The Leopard, but I can't remember what I thought of it, other than being impressed by the lushness. There wasn't a lot of lushness at the time - there's a reason why "we are starved of color up there" is my favourite line from AMOLAD - and things were frayed and mundane. The things we remember and the things we forget...
Since you are discussing rape, the career of former Seattle mayor Ed Murray may be of interest:
Edward Bernard Patrick Murray (born May 2, 1955) is an American politician from the state of Washington who most recently served as the 53rd mayor of Seattle from 2014 to 2017. A Democrat, he was previously a state legislator, first with the Washington State House of Representatives from 1996 to 2007, then the Washington State Senate from 2007 to 2013.
In 2017, Murray faced multiple allegations of child abuse, rape and sexual molestation, including from a family member and his adopted son. He denies the allegations.[2] Murray resigned as mayor of Seattle on September 12, 2017.
Politicians have a pretty bad record when it comes to rape and sexual abuse: Cyril Smith in the UK; Roy Moore, Andrew Cuomo, Ed Murray, Dennis Hastert, etc.
Why would they be so much different from the rest of the population ?
And if rape is more about power, then they're perhaps a population more, rather than less inclined in that direction.
A I correct that RefUK are back down to four MPs, possibly temporarily, because something else has emerged concerning James McMurdock?
Per the fragrant Tom Harwood on Twitter:
Reform MPs:
am 5th July 2024: 4 pm 5th July 2024: 5 7th March 2025: 4 2nd May 2025: 5 5th July 2025: 4
Odds on there being as many ex-Reform MPs as current Reform MPs at some point this Parliament?
The only positive for Reform if this MP does get the boot is that they can put someone they rate in as the candidate to replace him in the By Election. Murdock was not much more than a paper candidate really. I'd suggest Tommy Skinner, although he might be cut from the same cloth as Murdock dodgyness wise. Perhaps Zia Yusuf?
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
It is very good, though I’ve no idea how people could endure those banquets, in full evening dress, in the Sicilian heat, without air conditioning.
Yes! The insane dresses and high starched collars - like it’s London in March
But my word Sicily must have been gorgeous back then. When Palermo was still the golden shell - surrounded by citrus groves. When the coast was utterly unspoiled and the baroque towns glowed in the twilight
Also I’ve decided I want to be known in real life, henceforth, as THE FALCON
When I sweep into the Edinboro Castle in Camden for a drink I want the whole pub to fall respectfully silent, until a quietly awed girlish voice says in a whisper
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
It is very good, though I’ve no idea how people could endure those banquets, in full evening dress, in the Sicilian heat, without air conditioning.
Yes! The insane dresses and high starched collars - like it’s London in March
But my word Sicily must have been gorgeous back then. When Palermo was still the golden shell - surrounded by citrus groves. When the coast was utterly unspoiled and the baroque towns glowed in the twilight
Also I’ve decided I want to be known in real life, henceforth, as THE FALCON
When I sweep into the Edinboro Castle in Camden for a drink I want the whole pub to fall respectfully silent, until a quietly awed girlish voice says in a whisper
“The Falcon is here!”
Is that too much to ask? I don’t think so
It must have been very beautiful. Although, most of the inhabitants were essentially serfs.
It’s a place which has had a horrendous history, going back to ancient times.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
I don’t follow twitter but from the news reporting on the UK media I saw it was made pretty clear that the rapists were from all over France and outside France in some cases.
I’m never one to praise the BBC but I thought the reporting on the trial on the Today programme was very “good” (I don’t want to use that word due to the subject) and gave a very clear picture in a human but detailed way.
By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!
When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.
Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.
Stupid stupid stupid. The quickest way to power is entryism: fund those pols who agree with you and attack those pols who disagree with you. Bend them to your will (insert Dukat quote ) Forming a new party is a lot of grief for little gain.
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
It is very good, though I’ve no idea how people could endure those banquets, in full evening dress, in the Sicilian heat, without air conditioning.
Yes! The insane dresses and high starched collars - like it’s London in March
But my word Sicily must have been gorgeous back then. When Palermo was still the golden shell - surrounded by citrus groves. When the coast was utterly unspoiled and the baroque towns glowed in the twilight
Also I’ve decided I want to be known in real life, henceforth, as THE FALCON
When I sweep into the Edinboro Castle in Camden for a drink I want the whole pub to fall respectfully silent, until a quietly awed girlish voice says in a whisper
A I correct that RefUK are back down to four MPs, possibly temporarily, because something else has emerged concerning James McMurdock?
Yep - he took out 2 sets of bounce bank loans using dubious limited companies and then didn’t pay back the money
Tbh it's not even particularly hidden what he's done with the accounts presented at Companies House where you can put up any old shite. Unfortunately for him, whoever has prepared those stats has been completely honest.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
hang on say for example she was raped by 80 people (no idea how many) you are seriously trying to say that is better that being raped by 80 more local people? What sort of dick head are you....80 rapes is 80 rapes regardless of where the rapists are from
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
But most women aren’t staying single waiting for the unattainable man. The vast majority of people find partners, they settle, some get lucky and punch up. And 90% of men who are not “Alpha males” do not have to stay single.
There are huge swathes of women who hate “alpha males”, especially when both men and women grow up. For the vast majority of people they fall into a relationship from a random start or they find someone where it works and that’s great. It’s not some crazy reality tv programme where only the top gorilla gets the mates and everyone else just has to accept a lifetime of lonely wanking.
People are complicated, they don’t just want the absolute top because the top earner isn’t necessarily the best looking who isn’t necessarily the funniest who isn’t necessarily the most intelligent who might just be the shortest who happens to have the best eyes but doesn’t have as nice colour skin as the guy who is the top earner.
We all fancy different people with different skills, personalities, attitudes and chemistry. It’s not a simple competition otherwise I’d have all your wives right now.
I had a long chat once with a marine biologist who studied Sea Elephants. On the face of it a dominant male controls a 100 metre or so stretch of beach, and mates with 50 or more females, but that is only part of the story.
Firstly the females have a choice of "beachmasters", and can simply move to another bit of beach. They also become sexually mature at 7 years, while males only attain the size required to be beach master after 15 or more years. They are then so worn out and injured by fighting off rival males (who incidentally often succeed and depose the beachmaster) that they do not appear again as beachmaster. In addition while fighting one interloper, other interlopers will sneak in and father pups on their stretch of beach.
So the sexual career of a dominant male is both brief and self destroying. Meanwhile the females can go on for decades as a sorority.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
hang on say for example she was raped by 80 people (no idea how many) you are seriously trying to say that is better that being raped by 80 more local people? What sort of dick head are you....80 rapes is 80 rapes regardless of where the rapists are from
Isn’t the point that if one village had 1 in 10 up for a bit of rape, then ALL villages probably had that capacity, whereas the true number is much ‘better’.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
That statistic is clearly bollocks. The vast majority of non-alpha* males have long term successful relationships, including both you** and me.
*I don't accept the entire classification. We are not baboons and are social relationships are much more complicated.
** this is a compliment. I have never encountered anyone who self describes as "alpha male" who wasn't an arrogant arsehole.
This is clearly wrong because I’m a self-confessed alpha male, to the extent I am known in my neighbourhood as “THE FALCON”, and the idea I’m arrogant is obvious nonsense
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
hang on say for example she was raped by 80 people (no idea how many) you are seriously trying to say that is better that being raped by 80 more local people? What sort of dick head are you....80 rapes is 80 rapes regardless of where the rapists are from
Isn’t the point that if one village had 1 in 10 up for a bit of rape, then ALL villages probably had that capacity, whereas the true number is much ‘better’.
^ what he said.
“better” == less worse, but still bad, of course.
NB. This was the initial reporting - the BBC did much better during the actual trial IIRC.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
hang on say for example she was raped by 80 people (no idea how many) you are seriously trying to say that is better that being raped by 80 more local people? What sort of dick head are you....80 rapes is 80 rapes regardless of where the rapists are from
Isn’t the point that if one village had 1 in 10 up for a bit of rape, then ALL villages probably had that capacity, whereas the true number is much ‘better’.
We could only say that if everyone I the village was on the obscure website used by Pelicot. Presumably the vast majority were unaware.
And not one who did see the website thought "this is dodgy, and needs reporting to Le Flic". I don't think this unique to France, many men are willing to rape if they think they can get away with it, particularly those with power and influence.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
That statistic is clearly bollocks. The vast majority of non-alpha* males have long term successful relationships, including both you** and me.
*I don't accept the entire classification. We are not baboons and are social relationships are much more complicated.
** this is a compliment. I have never encountered anyone who self describes as "alpha male" who wasn't an arrogant arsehole.
This is clearly wrong because I’m a self-confessed alpha male, to the extent I am known in my neighbourhood as “THE FALCON”, and the idea I’m arrogant is obvious nonsense
As an aside, I suspect if you created a scatter chart with propotion of the population who are young men on one axis, and number of rapes on the other, then you would see a remarkable degree of correlation. Young men commit most of the rapes, and therefore the more young men there are, the higher the incidence of rape.
Of course, the people most likely to emigrate are young men, and therefore the more immigration you have, then the more young men, and also an imbalance between the number of young men and young women, which almost certainly increases the number of rapes.
If you wanted to lower the incidence of rape, the simplest way would probably be to import lots of young women. If there are lots more women than men, then even low status men are able to get girlfriends and wives, and therefore are less likely to commit rape.
Sorry disagree. Rape is not usually about sex but power
Even if it were usually about power, it is presumably sometimes about sex. So it would reduce the incidence of rape.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
I'm not celebrating being at the top of the table. I do think that the world has a big problem with rape, and it's a big problem that will take a lot of effort to tackle. One important step in tackling the problem is to encourage people to report rape to the police - and reporting rates are very low - the crime survey in 2020 put the reporting rate at only 16% in England & Wales.
So an early step in tackling rape would be to increase the reporting rate, which would lead to a *huge* increase in the reported rate of rape. Since an increase in the reporting rate would be a good step, an increase in the reported rate of rape could be seen as encouraging. Maybe Britain has the highest reporting rate of rape in the world. That would be a step in the right direction. We'd still have a big problem with rape that needs tackling.
The Irish mystery continues. What is the Home Office doing and why?
“It would take 5 minutes for any native born Irish person to demonstrate they speak English fluently. There are to my knowledge no exclusive Gaelic speakers. So this is just a route where non-English speakers can come here via Ireland. Why are we doing this?”
Having to pay for and attend an interview/test to prove you can speak English is a pretty substantial and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for applications.
This has been done because the DUP wanted it to be as easy for an Irish person living in Britain to gain British citizenship as it is for a British person living in Ireland to gain Irish citizenship.
That's it. Your paranoia about a backdoor for non-English speakers gaining British citizenship is a sad reflection of your monomania about immigration.
But it does make it extremely easy for non English speaking Irish people, with no knowledge of the UK, to gain British citizenship. Does it not? Kind of a back door for anyone who wants to become a British citizen but might be rejected by us in these tests
And given that Ireland is handing out passports to refugees like candy, that may be quite a few people
So maybe not so paranoid after all, you craven, pitiful halfwit
Such a person needs several years of residency in Ireland before they can gain Irish citizenship, and then they would need five years of residency in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. This is not some sort of quick-fix loophole, and I seriously doubt that there are going to be large numbers of Irish citizens applying for British citizenship, English-speaking or not.
You're so wrong, so often, and so insecure about it. So lame.
I just want to check
Was it you that said this yesterday? -
“The fact that Britain is top of the [world rape tables] is actually an encouraging sign”
Jeez I think I’d retire from PB for a week if I said something that mortifyingly inane and stupid. Impressive
The only people mortifyingly stupid would be those who didn't understand the point he was making.
Oh.
By your logic - and that of this thicko @LostPassword - the higher and higher Britain goes in terms of reported rapes the better and better it is, and if we end up with 1000x the reported rapes of any other country this is evermore “encouraging” coz it shows our women are increasingly confident
Presumably the goal is 4 thousand rapes a minute. Then we will be the most sexually enlightened place in the visible universe
That's not what I said and, despite the evidence to the contrary, I refuse to believe that you are that stupid to think that I did.
Is it better that 100% of rapes are reported to police or 16%?
It is better that there are fewer rapists than more. It is a fucking odd thing to celebrate. You think women are less likely to report rapes in Sweden? why? chances are more English women are being raped and you are celebrating it.
Question: were more people raped by Catholic priests in the 1970s (when the reported level was zero) or now?
I do not know. i would guess less. BUT you are assuming that the higher position of the UK on that list is due to solely to reporting. you have no basis to believe that. Far more likely that more women are actually being raped. if you can show me why Swedish women should be less likely to report rapes I am all ears.
If you can show me why the population of England is committing rape at almost twice the rate that the population of France is I am also all ears too.
I could have a guess but that is all it would be. We are top of reported rapes in the world. and the blaze response is "must be better reporting" yeah not a big fan of that response. lets instead think about what more we can do about rapes in the UK.
We can start by encouraging reporting, so that prosecutions can happen.
Sure but that does not make Being top of this table a cause for celebration unless you know the difference is entirely down to better reporting, and we do not know that. it is obvious I have a fundamental value difference with people on here about this. you do not want to face that the UK might have a very real issue here, I think we might. At least we both hope i'm wrong.
Many countries have a problem with rape. The Pelicot trial in France demonstrated how easy it is to find willing rapists online, even in a sleepy rural backwater.
The reporting on the Pelicot trial in the UK seems to have been based on a misreading of the reporting on the original French reports: Pelicot’s fellow rapists were drawn from across the entire local region, not his village / town. Half of them came from even further afield IIRC.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
hang on say for example she was raped by 80 people (no idea how many) you are seriously trying to say that is better that being raped by 80 more local people? What sort of dick head are you....80 rapes is 80 rapes regardless of where the rapists are from
Isn’t the point that if one village had 1 in 10 up for a bit of rape, then ALL villages probably had that capacity, whereas the true number is much ‘better’.
We could only say that if everyone I the village was on the obscure website used by Pelicot. Presumably the vast majority were unaware.
And not one who did see the website thought "this is dodgy, and needs reporting to Le Flic". I don't think this unique to France, many men are willing to rape if they think they can get away with it, particularly those with power and influence.
Again, not really, based on a limited understanding of the case in the U.K. It became portrayed to those who didn’t scrutinise as friends and neighbours of Pelicot, hence the idea that it was typical local chaps.
As an aside, I suspect if you created a scatter chart with propotion of the population who are young men on one axis, and number of rapes on the other, then you would see a remarkable degree of correlation. Young men commit most of the rapes, and therefore the more young men there are, the higher the incidence of rape.
Of course, the people most likely to emigrate are young men, and therefore the more immigration you have, then the more young men, and also an imbalance between the number of young men and young women, which almost certainly increases the number of rapes.
If you wanted to lower the incidence of rape, the simplest way would probably be to import lots of young women. If there are lots more women than men, then even low status men are able to get girlfriends and wives, and therefore are less likely to commit rape.
Sorry disagree. Rape is not usually about sex but power
Even if it were usually about power, it is presumably sometimes about sex. So it would reduce the incidence of rape.
Majority of rapes are by an "intimate partner"
Quite. Been married and having sex for twenty years, one night you are up for it and she isn’t, you force the issue, that’s rape. The public imagining of rape is the dark alley and a shadowy figure with a knife. The vast, vast majority are not like that.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
There's no conflict between feminism and women choosing not to work and look after their kids: the point is that it has to be a choice and not forced. But being beholden to a partner for money can also make them subservient to the partner if the partner is so inclined. Which again is fine if it is a free choice; but also somewhat goes against some feminist thinking.
However, it is interesting to see people say that women should be able to choose not to work, and those who want to ban the hijab, niqab or burqa as they are 'forced' on women.
If a woman can choose to be subservient to a partner in a relationship, why can another woman not choose to wear such headgear?
The issue with the hijab, niquab and burqua....I agree with you if they choose it. However some dont choose that life and have it forced on them. I give an example my son had been dating a girl for a couple of years and they were getting on for two years when they were getting towards two years, she had been round the house lots eaten with us, she was bright. They were getting serious so had to ask her do your parents know, did talk it over with my son first about what might happen. Yes her parents objected 1 month later she had been to pakistan and was married to a cousin she had never met. Now personally I think that might have been forced and now instead of the bright friendly intelligent girl I remember next time I saw her was traipsing along 2m behind her new husband eyes downcast and ignoring all her old friends from school
Indeed. But it's the same with women not working and having to look after loads of babies: some don't choose that life and have it forced upon them.
In fact, that was probably the norm just a few decades ago.
And that's where @HYUFD wants us to return to. And like the burqa etc, it is because of a particular religious interpretation.
It is not just the very religious, as already stated young men across the western world are increasingly voting for far right and populist right parties in part because they back their support for a return to more traditional gender roles
Lets cull young men then it will sort the issue
Or they could cull the likes of you
I however am not the problem young men are expecting stuff they cant have
Yes having a committed relationship with a woman and the prospect of fatherhood as every generation of men before them has had is something they are no longer entitled to in your view.
Hence they will vote ever more far right and populist right
Nobody is "entitled" to a relationship.
If you want a relationship, work on pleasing the other person more than you try to please yourself.
Sorry why should they play ball, they know what they want if men cant meet that then the fault is on the men
So apparently the 90% of men who are not rich and good looking Alpha males have to be lifelong single and celibate because most women are chasing an unattainable for most 10% of men!
That statistic is clearly bollocks. The vast majority of non-alpha* males have long term successful relationships, including both you** and me.
*I don't accept the entire classification. We are not baboons and are social relationships are much more complicated.
** this is a compliment. I have never encountered anyone who self describes as "alpha male" who wasn't an arrogant arsehole.
This is clearly wrong because I’m a self-confessed alpha male, to the extent I am known in my neighbourhood as “THE FALCON”, and the idea I’m arrogant is obvious nonsense
An alpha male by some accounts previously identifying as LadyG.?
By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!
When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.
Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.
Stupid stupid stupid. The quickest way to power is entryism: fund those pols who agree with you and attack those pols who disagree with you. Bend them to your will (insert Dukat quote ) Forming a new party is a lot of grief for little gain.
Why when I read that story did I think of Brewster's Millions. I would have thought the easiest way to lose $100m or even $1bn and have nothing to show for it would be to create and fund a new political party in the States.
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
I'd wondered whether to give that a go. Thanks.
It’s everything you want from a Lampedusa adaptation. Magnificent baroque palaces, beautiful girls singing Mozart, lemon trees in the Palermo sun, handsome men with sultry mistresses, and Garibaldi landing on the shore! Also excellent acting and nice pacey narrative
It feels like a luxurious treat. Like a candied Sicilian dessert of a period drama
Netflix’s adaptation of The Leopard is fantastic. A swooning portrayal of pre-lapsarian Sicily
I'd wondered whether to give that a go. Thanks.
It’s everything you want from a Lampedusa adaptation. Magnificent baroque palaces, beautiful girls singing Mozart, lemon trees in the Palermo sun, handsome men with sultry mistresses, and Garibaldi landing on the shore! Also excellent acting and nice pacey narrative
It feels like a luxurious treat. Like a candied Sicilian dessert of a period drama
I was interested to learn that there was a pro-Bourbon insurgency, for nearly twenty years, after Unification. The Italian government was more brutal than the Bourbons had been.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
You could also ban contraception and abortion. Romania managed to grow its population this way, albeit with orphanages.
You probably have to row back a fair way on women's rights and heavily reward it socially and in the tax system to boost population.
Women themselves, on average, want to have more children. You don't have to fight them to force them to do so. You just need to make it easier for them.
One option is to make it socially acceptable for women to have children without a long-term partner. Waiting for Mr Right to come along (who themself is ready to be a parent) seems to be one of the bigger impediments. And then, of course, you need to have the support to ensure that those children grown up to be well-adjusted without a Dad.
Or women, especially graduate career women, could be less fussy in the men they are willing to date and marry
Just the women should? Did you just marry any old girl or did you wait to find someone you fancied and felt you could make a life partnership with? I think a lot of men should be very glad that a lot of women are less fussy about who they are willing to date and marry.
Men need to up their game for starters - have you noticed how terribly British men dress, especially in the summer? Like overgrown children.
Maybe the guys need to stop fetishising the Love Island look and go for brains and then they might talk to the graduate career women who don’t look the part and both find a match.
Graduate career women know that having children will, in most cases, kibosh their career. Sure there are laws and regulations to stop it but frankly they have a choice of banging out a family earlier then going back to their career and building from there or stopping when they have career momentum and having the children.
I know some who have become board level at banks and law firms but they are the exceptions.
Many will understandably choose their career - would you give up your career to raise your children instead of your wife?
Being a good father has sod all to do with how well you dress.
Throughout history most women never had a career at all, their primary role was being home makers and raising children.
They can work part time in the early years when their children are young and then shift back to full time as they start school.
If they are rich enough to be at board level at banks and law firms they are rich enough to get nannies too
This ignorance is why these women have rejected you. They can work when and how the fuck they like without your approval and funnily enough, a lot of women, far more successful than you, would like not to hand over the upbringing of their children to a nanny, and have to make that decision not out of pure choice but because biology means they are the only party in the relationship who can gestate children.
I am married as I said, not to a liberal self absorbed career above all else woman however.
I don't give a shit how successful women are career wise at the end of the day if they want children they should find a man and stick to them and yes that may well mean giving up working full time when their children are young and if they don't want a nanny.
Why do you think many young men are surging to the far right and populist right across the western world in elections while young women vote still mainly for 'progressive' parties?
It is because in part many young men are fed up of traditional gender roles being discarded and some women putting their careers first so much they refuse to even consider a role for most men in their lives and as husbands and fathers
Your last paragraph is weird
Why should women be subservient to men ?
Well the Bible says it so if you are a traditional Christian
'Ephesians 5:22-24: "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior."
Or for Muslims Surah An-Nisa (4:34) "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more [strength] than the other, and because they support them from their means."
So that is Paul's opinion not God/Jesus. Also the Islamic quote doesn't say anything about women being subservient to men. You can protect and support your wife without suborning her
I dunno, but I’m PRETTY sure Islam is quite firm on the “women are subservient” thing. Just a hunch
I also wonder how many of you brave atheists would be as rude to a devout Muslim on here, as you are to dear old @HYUFD
I suspect very few of you would manage it
🙋♂️
I couldn't care less which medieval religion people have, I'm quite happy to speak my mind either way. Have done so in the past and on this site was called Islamophobic by someone here for disagreeing with their beliefs. Was someone who didn't last long, can't remember their name.
I was criticised a few years ago on here for using the phrase 'Middle Eastern Sky Fairies' to describe the Abrahamic religions.
So you should be, though it's an opinion and expression you are absolutely entitled to hold and use. It doesn't really do justice to the traditions exemplified in Avicenna (Ibn Sina), Thomas Aquinas and Moses Maimonides. And there is even stuff in theAbrahamic religions traditions after the 13th century worth a look.
It reflects perfectly the irrational belief in imaginary entities who are used as an excuse for all manner of inhumane actions both large and small.
In this day and age why should I show any respect for those who still believe in these fairy tales? All the more so when they are willing to kill and oppress others who do not share those beliefs.
For a while at least, but one thing people don't understand about billionaires is that they don't necessarily have a lot of cash. They're billionaires because they own a lot of assets, and if Musk starts spending a lot of time trying to start a political party, and having the power of the American state turned against his business interests, then his assets could start to lose a lot of value, very quickly.
In a battle between an authoritarian and an oligarch, the oligarch always loses.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
The NSDAP isn't a proscribed terrorist organisation as far as I am aware, indeed it no longer exists, so expressing support for it is unlikely to be a crime.
But as terrorism is in the eye of the beholder, I believe you should be able to express support for them, if you wish. What you should not be able to do is to take concrete steps to aid them.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
I think it feels like free speech has contracted because of the effect of social media. Lucy Connolly would have been an unpleasant racist bigot in the local pub, not locked up in prison, if social media didn’t exist. We have the ability to broadcast our thoughts to thousands, millions with a few clicks, so naturally there is more scrutiny, and if you like, less freedom.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
The NSDAP isn't a proscribed terrorist organisation as far as I am aware, indeed it no longer exists, so expressing support for it is unlikely to be a crime.
But as terrorism is in the eye of the beholder, I believe you should be able to express support for them, if you wish. What you should not be able to do is to take concrete steps to aid them.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
The NSDAP isn't a proscribed terrorist organisation as far as I am aware, indeed it no longer exists, so expressing support for it is unlikely to be a crime.
But as terrorism is in the eye of the beholder, I believe you should be able to express support for them, if you wish. What you should not be able to do is to take concrete steps to aid them.
The law has been written to create an offence that is easy to prosecute.
It can be hard to prove membership of a banned organisation. Much easier to find evidence for an expression of support.
I believe these laws were created in response to the so-called Islamic "hate preachers" in the early 00's that there was a tabloid campaign against. These sorts of laws always end up being used more widely.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
Turns out J D Vance wasn’t wrong, after all, eh?
No, he wasn't.
Since he implied the US was far better in this respect, then yes, he was. The modern interpretation of the 1st Amendment isn't all that old, and Trump is having a crack at rolling it back.
Speaking of marriages, I recall a story I read in the Washington Post years ago. A young black woman in DC was worried about her two sons, who were getting to an age where they might be tempted by the gang culture. So she took a trip to a small town in Montana to see if they could resettle there.
The trip went well, but she was bothered by one thing she had noticed. When she was in a local restaurant, she had noticed some women who appeared to be talking about her.
After her move, she got to know the women and asked them what they had been discussing. They confessed that the women were thinking of a single black man in the area and were considering whether they should call him in to give him a chance to meet this nice lady.
Because, as we all know, a single American man, if employed, "must be in want of a wife".
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
A I correct that RefUK are back down to four MPs, possibly temporarily, because something else has emerged concerning James McMurdock?
Theres claims he took tax payers money to support businesses that existed in name only. The absolute state of reform. They will get no where near power.
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
I think it feels like free speech has contracted because of the effect of social media. Lucy Connolly would have been an unpleasant racist bigot in the local pub, not locked up in prison, if social media didn’t exist. We have the ability to broadcast our thoughts to thousands, millions with a few clicks, so naturally there is more scrutiny, and if you like, less freedom.
I remember, early doors internet, thinking "Oh! Lovely! The furries can chat to other furries! The model railway people can talk to other model railway people!".
I didn't twig that it also meant "Mad Jim, who the barman warns you about, who has a Thing About The French and The Blacks" could talk to "Mad Bert, who the....".
And thus we get 5G/Covid/Whatever graffiti chalked on the local park walkways, Reform/ALBA 'NOTA' flocks, ... and the rest.
Still, I generated a cute picture of a cat earlier using AI. So... swings and roundabouts.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
Bought tickets for Edgbaston tomorrow, but for the first time it looks like they won't let me print the tickets out at home. Not sure what to do now, because when I took my laptop to Headingley they said I couldn't take my laptop into the ground. Last year it was still an option to print them out at home.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
"The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition." - Boris, 2003
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
If people were expressing support for the NSDAP we would rightly arrest them, surely? Free speech is never absolute. Express support for Gazans. That’s fine.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
I think it feels like free speech has contracted because of the effect of social media. Lucy Connolly would have been an unpleasant racist bigot in the local pub, not locked up in prison, if social media didn’t exist. We have the ability to broadcast our thoughts to thousands, millions with a few clicks, so naturally there is more scrutiny, and if you like, less freedom.
I remember, early doors internet, thinking "Oh! Lovely! The furries can chat to other furries! The model railway people can talk to other model railway people!".
I didn't twig that it also meant "Mad Jim, who the barman warns you about, who has a Thing About The French and The Blacks" could talk to "Mad Bert, who the....".
And thus we get 5G/Covid/Whatever graffiti chalked on the local park walkways, Reform/ALBA 'NOTA' flocks, ... and the rest.
Still, I generated a cute picture of a cat earlier using AI. So... swings and roundabouts.
Um, the stories about Richard Franklin (the actor of Mike Yates) are legendary and unpleasant. Not the fact that he was gay - in JNT era Dr Who many were, and Matthew Waterhouse got his job in a highly unconventional manner - but that the youth and consent issues around his advances to fans would even now not be tolerated. Look how Lalla Ward described him
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
"The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition." - Boris, 2003
Theory: the internet hasn't made life better. Anyone agree?
The internet is a tool just like any other tool. It can be used for good and for ill.
I would likely never have met my wife nearly eighteen years ago had it not been for the internet, and that would have robbed me of many great shared experiences and a love that looks set to last a lifetime.
Yesterday I baked my wife a birthday cake. The recipe I used was found on Instagram.
Now, sure, people had cake recipes before the internet, but the internet makes finding recipes a lot easier, and there are more to choose from. A greater range of experiences are therefore available to enrich our lives.
My wife is interested in trying out a pizza recipe which has grapes as a topping - thanks to the internet.
It is not to defend HYUFD's stance, which I disagree with, but two 20ish girls I spoke to recently were furious with 'Emily Pankhurst' for forcing women into the workplace 'How dare she make that decision for everyone else?'.
She didn't.
Women are not forced into the workplace. It's a free choice if they want a career or if they want to be a stay at home mum.
Thats what Pankhurst fought for, choice, and I thought that Conservatives were in favour of choice.
I didn't say she did. Nor were the two people criticising her Conservatives to my knowledge.
Today’s Rawnsley, early as the sun came up at 0255 here this morning:
The great rebellion over welfare, combined with the thought-concentrating milestone of a year in power, demands a rethink about how this government operates. On that, everyone agrees. There is a big decision for Sir Keir to make and that is whether to keep Rachel Reeves at the Treasury or to find himself a new chancellor.
The government is not getting the credit ministers think it deserves for the things it is doing that ought to be liked by Labour people. I don’t think it is fair to lump all the blame for that failure on the Treasury. It is the prime minister who has the central responsibility for fashioning an attractive vision of the future and conveying it to the country. If the government lacks a compelling over-arching story, the buck stops with Sir Keir, not his nextdoor neighbour.
One minister who knows his history remarks: “Harold Wilson used to complain about the gnomes of Zurich. This is a rare example of the bond markets doing a favour for a Labour chancellor.” Her people argue that the tears have, paradoxically,made the chancellor safer by humanising her rather robotic public image and underlining the risks of removing her.
Sir Keir’s assurances that Ms Reeves is secure in her job to the next election “and beyond” can’t be taken to the bank. He said it because he had to say it. The prime minister, who is on his third chief of staff, has a history of ruthlessness which suggests that he has enough ice in his breast to fire her from the Treasury if he concludes that is in his best interests. But would it be? If Rachel Reeves stays, there may be trouble. If she goes, it could be double.
I'll give you my regular spiel on the matter. It goes like this:
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed * There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting. * The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary. * As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded. * Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping. * I hate this.
If free speech has never existed, then how can it be contracting ?
It's zero. But it's a smaller zero than before. It's a much smaller amount of nothing than the absolutely ginormous nothing it was before.
"The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition." - Boris, 2003
And he would know better than most.
Projection... the people who talk such twaddle have developed a reflexive contempt. Meanwhile the Lib Dems are getting more done, and expressing more if what the majority of the country believes... the result is a steady increase in poll ratings and a broad range of by election victories across the whole country. The Lib Dem derangement syndrome, especially from the right is increasingly fun to watch. They simply cannot accept that Ed Davey is not only a serious guy, he also knows what he is doing and where he is going. That is a pretty rare situation in British politics at the moment.
F1: currently, light rain is forecast. Anyway, going to peruse the markets.
I'd love 'light rain'. I'm racing in a couple of hours, and thunderstorms are forecast. We're not too far from Silverstone.
Having said that, I've just been for a short local walk, and it's blooming beautiful out there this morning. I find the forecast hard to believe.
Oh, and if anyone's interested, Challenge Roth, a famous long-distance triathlon, is currently on. A couple of people I know are racing, and one is hoping to win her age group. You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZpjsIbN4fw
Comments
Thanks.
But my word Sicily must have been gorgeous back then. When Palermo was still the golden shell - surrounded by citrus groves. When the coast was utterly unspoiled and the baroque towns glowed in the twilight
Also I’ve decided I want to be known in real life, henceforth, as THE FALCON
When I sweep into the Edinboro Castle in Camden for a drink I want the whole pub to fall respectfully silent, until a quietly awed girlish voice says in a whisper
“The Falcon is here!”
Is that too much to ask? I don’t think so
By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!
When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.
Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.
There are huge swathes of women who hate “alpha males”, especially when both men and women grow up. For the vast majority of people they fall into a relationship from a random start or they find someone where it works and that’s great. It’s not some crazy reality tv programme where only the top gorilla gets the mates and everyone else just has to accept a lifetime of lonely wanking.
People are complicated, they don’t just want the absolute top because the top earner isn’t necessarily the best looking who isn’t necessarily the funniest who isn’t necessarily the most intelligent who might just be the shortest who happens to have the best eyes but doesn’t have as nice colour skin as the guy who is the top earner.
We all fancy different people with different skills, personalities, attitudes and chemistry. It’s not a simple competition otherwise I’d have all your wives right now.
Reform MPs:
am 5th July 2024: 4
pm 5th July 2024: 5
7th March 2025: 4
2nd May 2025: 5
5th July 2025: 4
*I don't accept the entire classification. We are not baboons and are social relationships are much more complicated.
** this is a compliment. I have never encountered anyone who self describes as "alpha male" who wasn't an arrogant arsehole.
Why would they be so much different from the rest of the population ?
And if rape is more about power, then they're perhaps a population more, rather than less inclined in that direction.
‘The Turkey is here!’
Gobble.
Still absolutely awful, obviously. But not (thankfully) the insane levels of awful that people were claiming on English language Twitter at the time.
(I’d have to go back and look at the figures, but IIRC people were claiming online that 1/10 local men were willing participants when the real ratio was more on the order of 1 in 1,000.)
It’s a place which has had a horrendous history, going back to ancient times.
I’m never one to praise the BBC but I thought the reporting on the trial on the Today programme was very “good” (I don’t want to use that word due to the subject) and gave a very clear picture in a human but detailed way.
Firstly the females have a choice of "beachmasters", and can simply move to another bit of beach. They also become sexually mature at 7 years, while males only attain the size required to be beach master after 15 or more years. They are then so worn out and injured by fighting off rival males (who incidentally often succeed and depose the beachmaster) that they do not appear again as beachmaster. In addition while fighting one interloper, other interlopers will sneak in and father pups on their stretch of beach.
So the sexual career of a dominant male is both brief and self destroying. Meanwhile the females can go on for decades as a sorority.
^ what he said.
“better” == less worse, but still bad, of course.
NB. This was the initial reporting - the BBC did much better during the actual trial IIRC.
And not one who did see the website thought "this is dodgy, and needs reporting to Le Flic". I don't think this unique to France, many men are willing to rape if they think they can get away with it, particularly those with power and influence.
I don’t wish to overstep, let alone be all “alpha”, but the message MUST be in Italian, addressing me formally, viz:
“Mio degnissimo e rispettatissimo Signore, Leone dei Damus, il possente duca noto a tutti come “Il Falco”, umilmente imploro..”
Then you must wait three tides of the sea, until I reply with a Yea or Nay. Only then can we engage in debate, if I am so willing
That seems a step too far limiting freedom of speech.
Officers are responding to a protest in support of Palestine Action in Parliament Square.
The group is now proscribed and expressing support for them is a criminal offence.
Arrests are being made.
https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/1941481530003526025
Further updates will be shared here.
So an early step in tackling rape would be to increase the reporting rate, which would lead to a *huge* increase in the reported rate of rape. Since an increase in the reporting rate would be a good step, an increase in the reported rate of rape could be seen as encouraging. Maybe Britain has the highest reporting rate of rape in the world. That would be a step in the right direction. We'd still have a big problem with rape that needs tackling.
The public imagining of rape is the dark alley and a shadowy figure with a knife. The vast, vast majority are not like that.
https://x.com/rogerwaters/status/1941571779857895768
Kemi Badenoch makes welfare a dividing line with Labour and Reform'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/07/05/ban-foreigners-from-claiming-disability-benefits-tories/
We're not even trying to be a free country, are we?.... (
It feels like a luxurious treat. Like a candied Sicilian dessert of a period drama
* Free speech does not exist, and never has existed
* There is merely things it is fashionable to say, and things which will get you arrested for saying, and the boundary is ever shifting.
* The only task of the statistician is to track it and note the moving boundary.
* As technology has expanded, the opportunity to note speech and arrest people for it has expanded.
* Consequently, free speech has contracted in the UK, and I don't see this stopping.
* I hate this.
In this day and age why should I show any respect for those who still believe in these fairy tales? All the more so when they are willing to kill and oppress others who do not share those beliefs.
In a battle between an authoritarian and an oligarch, the oligarch always loses.
But as terrorism is in the eye of the beholder, I believe you should be able to express support for them, if you wish. What you should not be able to do is to take concrete steps to aid them.
It can be hard to prove membership of a banned organisation. Much easier to find evidence for an expression of support.
I believe these laws were created in response to the so-called Islamic "hate preachers" in the early 00's that there was a tabloid campaign against. These sorts of laws always end up being used more widely.
The modern interpretation of the 1st Amendment isn't all that old, and Trump is having a crack at rolling it back.
JD doesn't seem fussed about that.
Extreme Temperatures Around The World
@extremetemps
‼️EXTRAORDINARY WORLD RECORD
Brutal 48.5C Chillas,PAKISTAN 🇵🇰 1250m !
WORLD RECORD OF HIGHEST TEMPERATURE ABOVE 1000M asl
https://x.com/extremetemps/status/1941521637255544991
The trip went well, but she was bothered by one thing she had noticed. When she was in a local restaurant, she had noticed some women who appeared to be talking about her.
After her move, she got to know the women and asked them what they had been discussing. They confessed that the women were thinking of a single black man in the area and were considering whether they should call him in to give him a chance to meet this nice lady.
Because, as we all know, a single American man, if employed, "must be in want of a wife".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c15np18yy24t
https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1941576562459181078
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qanF-91aJo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob86Wqn5JWw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsaRfnZCHCo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9W29CH8WiU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lVdMbUx1_k
If anyone likes a bit of metal/fuzz/whatever.
I didn't twig that it also meant "Mad Jim, who the barman warns you about, who has a Thing About The French and The Blacks" could talk to "Mad Bert, who the....".
And thus we get 5G/Covid/Whatever graffiti chalked on the local park walkways, Reform/ALBA 'NOTA' flocks, ... and the rest.
Still, I generated a cute picture of a cat earlier using AI. So... swings and roundabouts.
(Somewhat related. For old-time Dr.Who fans, the politics of 'Mike Yates' is quite the story.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Franklin_(actor)#Political_activities )
Nowt’s what it is was,
External objects can't improve your peace and happiness.
That comes from within.
I would likely never have met my wife nearly eighteen years ago had it not been for the internet, and that would have robbed me of many great shared experiences and a love that looks set to last a lifetime.
Now, sure, people had cake recipes before the internet, but the internet makes finding recipes a lot easier, and there are more to choose from. A greater range of experiences are therefore available to enrich our lives.
My wife is interested in trying out a pizza recipe which has grapes as a topping - thanks to the internet.
LongTime🤓FirstTime👨💻
@LongTimeHistory
·
13m
Full local news coverage. 👇
Cynthia Olivera is "desperate" after arrested by ICE at green card interview for being in the U.S. illegally.
Both she and her husband supported Trump’s campaign promise to launch the largest deportation program for criminals in U.S. history.
https://x.com/LongTimeHistory/status/1941636860884738144
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/05/british-new-banknotes-bank-of-england-money
The great rebellion over welfare, combined with the thought-concentrating milestone of a year in power, demands a rethink about how this government operates. On that, everyone agrees. There is a big decision for Sir Keir to make and that is whether to keep Rachel Reeves at the Treasury or to find himself a new chancellor.
The government is not getting the credit ministers think it deserves for the things it is doing that ought to be liked by Labour people. I don’t think it is fair to lump all the blame for that failure on the Treasury. It is the prime minister who has the central responsibility for fashioning an attractive vision of the future and conveying it to the country. If the government lacks a compelling over-arching story, the buck stops with Sir Keir, not his nextdoor neighbour.
One minister who knows his history remarks: “Harold Wilson used to complain about the gnomes of Zurich. This is a rare example of the bond markets doing a favour for a Labour chancellor.” Her people argue that the tears have, paradoxically,made the chancellor safer by humanising her rather robotic public image and underlining the risks of removing her.
Sir Keir’s assurances that Ms Reeves is secure in her job to the next election “and beyond” can’t be taken to the bank. He said it because he had to say it. The prime minister, who is on his third chief of staff, has a history of ruthlessness which suggests that he has enough ice in his breast to fire her from the Treasury if he concludes that is in his best interests. But would it be? If Rachel Reeves stays, there may be trouble. If she goes, it could be double.
Tools can be useful. The problem is not the tool; the problem is people using the tools in stupid or incorrect ways.
F1: currently, light rain is forecast. Anyway, going to peruse the markets.
The Lib Dem derangement syndrome, especially from the right is increasingly fun to watch. They simply cannot accept that Ed Davey is not only a serious guy, he also knows what he is doing and where he is going. That is a pretty rare situation in British politics at the moment.
Having said that, I've just been for a short local walk, and it's blooming beautiful out there this morning. I find the forecast hard to believe.
Oh, and if anyone's interested, Challenge Roth, a famous long-distance triathlon, is currently on. A couple of people I know are racing, and one is hoping to win her age group. You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZpjsIbN4fw
In contrast, I'll be doing 1/8th the distance...