Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You look after your own while trying to leave them a half reasonable society to thrive in!. " Pulling up the drawbridge might leave them struggling in a world intolerant to who they are or what they need. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One example I can think of is those who live rurally and then protest vigorously against any further development. At one stage where they live would have been a field too. " Normally the ones who have moved into the area from city living or it's a second home. Typical NIMBY see it alot around where I live. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You look after your own while trying to leave them a half reasonable society to thrive in!. Pulling up the drawbridge might leave them struggling in a world intolerant to who they are or what they need. " . It's a possibility, but less likely than the other problems. Most people don't trust politics anymore, it's full of mixed messages like 40 years of telling women they need to work and have less kids while spending the next 30 years telling us were living in an aging society that needs immigration. Most women are deeply unhappy about the work/child juggling relationship | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You look after your own while trying to leave them a half reasonable society to thrive in!. Pulling up the drawbridge might leave them struggling in a world intolerant to who they are or what they need. . It's a possibility, but less likely than the other problems. Most people don't trust politics anymore, it's full of mixed messages like 40 years of telling women they need to work and have less kids while spending the next 30 years telling us were living in an aging society that needs immigration. Most women are deeply unhappy about the work/child juggling relationship" I have employed and worked with a lot of women. The assumption that the burden of childcare should always be theirs comes up a fair amount. Men I have employed have all been keen to take the two weeks but only a handful have then adjusted their hours to encompass nursery/school pick up. The OP is about pulling up the bridge and denying people the advantage you had. I can't operate like that. I pay it forward whenever and wherever I can. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One example I can think of is those who live rurally and then protest vigorously against any further development. At one stage where they live would have been a field too. Normally the ones who have moved into the area from city living or it's a second home. Typical NIMBY see it alot around where I live. " I'm London but have noticed it more with second home owners as I go around the country for work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You look after your own while trying to leave them a half reasonable society to thrive in!. Pulling up the drawbridge might leave them struggling in a world intolerant to who they are or what they need. . It's a possibility, but less likely than the other problems. Most people don't trust politics anymore, it's full of mixed messages like 40 years of telling women they need to work and have less kids while spending the next 30 years telling us were living in an aging society that needs immigration. Most women are deeply unhappy about the work/child juggling relationship I have employed and worked with a lot of women. The assumption that the burden of childcare should always be theirs comes up a fair amount. Men I have employed have all been keen to take the two weeks but only a handful have then adjusted their hours to encompass nursery/school pick up. The OP is about pulling up the bridge and denying people the advantage you had. I can't operate like that. I pay it forward whenever and wherever I can. " . In general Men can't afford to work less hours when your facing extra costs like children, most of them actually work more hours to make up for their partners losing time with the children. When the woman earns more most roles are then reversed but most don't want to, it's a natural instinct of women to want to raise the child as much as possible. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You look after your own while trying to leave them a half reasonable society to thrive in!. Pulling up the drawbridge might leave them struggling in a world intolerant to who they are or what they need. . It's a possibility, but less likely than the other problems. Most people don't trust politics anymore, it's full of mixed messages like 40 years of telling women they need to work and have less kids while spending the next 30 years telling us were living in an aging society that needs immigration. Most women are deeply unhappy about the work/child juggling relationship I have employed and worked with a lot of women. The assumption that the burden of childcare should always be theirs comes up a fair amount. Men I have employed have all been keen to take the two weeks but only a handful have then adjusted their hours to encompass nursery/school pick up. The OP is about pulling up the bridge and denying people the advantage you had. I can't operate like that. I pay it forward whenever and wherever I can. . In general Men can't afford to work less hours when your facing extra costs like children, most of them actually work more hours to make up for their partners losing time with the children. When the woman earns more most roles are then reversed but most don't want to, it's a natural instinct of women to want to raise the child as much as possible. " I'm not going to start the natural instinct versus learned from birth debate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've had quite a few immigrants tell me "we" are letting in too many immigrants. Some say it's pushing up housing demand and prices and our children are being priced out of London; school class numbers are too high, and immigrants competing for work is lowering wages and there's less work for them. One Lithuanian man my husband worked with said the Polish construction workers were investing all of Europe, pushing people out of work by working for half of what the usual wage is. " A couple of years ago, just before that vote, a discussion with a Polish waitress left me shaking my head wondering how she could defend saying that the Poles coming now were not good enough to be admitted. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Right, that's it - I've had sex with enough women and am not denying any more of you the chance to bump uglies." Not denying? When can I cross your drawbridge?  As you know, my uglies are pretty ugly but need a bump.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything." I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When the woman earns more most roles are then reversed but most don't want to, it's a natural instinct of women to want to raise the child as much as possible. I'm not going to start the natural instinct versus learned from birth debate. " . Well you started a thread on "natural instinct". You only have to look around the natural world to see it's a perfectly natural thing for the vast majority of female species to raise the off spring, isn't it?. What would make you think we'd be any different | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When the woman earns more most roles are then reversed but most don't want to, it's a natural instinct of women to want to raise the child as much as possible. I'm not going to start the natural instinct versus learned from birth debate. . Well you started a thread on "natural instinct". You only have to look around the natural world to see it's a perfectly natural thing for the vast majority of female species to raise the off spring, isn't it?. What would make you think we'd be any different" Penguins. Seahorses.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything. I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? " . You'll have to run that by me again!. What has Terry Gilliam been given that he's now denying others? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When the woman earns more most roles are then reversed but most don't want to, it's a natural instinct of women to want to raise the child as much as possible. I'm not going to start the natural instinct versus learned from birth debate. . Well you started a thread on "natural instinct". You only have to look around the natural world to see it's a perfectly natural thing for the vast majority of female species to raise the off spring, isn't it?. What would make you think we'd be any different Penguins. Seahorses.." . out of 100,000 species!. You know that makes it the exception to the rule | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it just natural human behaviour to pull up the drawbridge after achieving a level of success and comfort? I see it with migrants: We're fine but don't let any more in (unless it's my family). Women in the workplace: I prefer to work with men; I was back at work the day after I gave birth. Home ownership: I struggled and managed to buy (in a different market) and I'm going to ensure it's unaffordable for others. Terry Gilliam: I tell people I'm a black lesbian. LGBT: We fought and suffered, but trans people are pushing it too far wanting to be called this, that and the other. I'm sure there are other examples." I often think that when colonial powers talk about migrants not mixing and the fear of being overrun. Can you say "expat community?" Do you think the aborigines and native Americans would have been so welcoming? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything. I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? . You'll have to run that by me again!. What has Terry Gilliam been given that he's now denying others?" The Monty Python crew were given carte blanche and BBC resources to create whatever they wanted to. When the series first came out it didn't do very well. They were then indulged to make another one and it took off and, as we know, the four series' have become classics. He has objected to the BBC giving minorities the chance to make comedy (and other programming), claiming "Allen’s] statement made me so angry, all of us so angry. Comedy is not assembled, it’s not like putting together a boy band where you put together one of this, one of that everyone is represented.” Yet Monty Python was an assemblage of people who sort of got on sometimes and mucked around trying different things. Privilege personified. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it just natural human behaviour to pull up the drawbridge after achieving a level of success and comfort? I see it with migrants: We're fine but don't let any more in (unless it's my family). Women in the workplace: I prefer to work with men; I was back at work the day after I gave birth. Home ownership: I struggled and managed to buy (in a different market) and I'm going to ensure it's unaffordable for others. Terry Gilliam: I tell people I'm a black lesbian. LGBT: We fought and suffered, but trans people are pushing it too far wanting to be called this, that and the other. I'm sure there are other examples. I often think that when colonial powers talk about migrants not mixing and the fear of being overrun. Can you say "expat community?" Do you think the aborigines and native Americans would have been so welcoming?" Expat only gets used to describe British migrants, cos you can't call *them* migrants, can you? 
When native Americans and Australians were welcoming they contracted diseases and encountered behaviours of conquerers.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I think it's evident on a large scale. I know it sounds jaded, but there's very few truly altruistic sorts about. We're all guilty of it, and it's a natural phenomenon? We see others as a threat, in various contexts? Mine? I love the country and tranquillity and seek out those remote areas, but feel a sense of annoyance when tourists arrive. Silly really as I love talking to them about how beautiful I find the area. We're all work in progress." We are. It just feels like we're going backwards at the moment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One example I can think of is those who live rurally and then protest vigorously against any further development. At one stage where they live would have been a field too. " Ah the NIMBY | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything. I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? . You'll have to run that by me again!. What has Terry Gilliam been given that he's now denying others? The Monty Python crew were given carte blanche and BBC resources to create whatever they wanted to. When the series first came out it didn't do very well. They were then indulged to make another one and it took off and, as we know, the four series' have become classics. He has objected to the BBC giving minorities the chance to make comedy (and other programming), claiming "Allen’s] statement made me so angry, all of us so angry. Comedy is not assembled, it’s not like putting together a boy band where you put together one of this, one of that everyone is represented.” Yet Monty Python was an assemblage of people who sort of got on sometimes and mucked around trying different things. Privilege personified. " . I'd probably agree with him, money and resources by the BBC should go to the most deserving regardless of colour or background. I'm presuming Monty python made it on merit of talent and not on whether they were "privileged" or not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything. I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? . You'll have to run that by me again!. What has Terry Gilliam been given that he's now denying others? The Monty Python crew were given carte blanche and BBC resources to create whatever they wanted to. When the series first came out it didn't do very well. They were then indulged to make another one and it took off and, as we know, the four series' have become classics. He has objected to the BBC giving minorities the chance to make comedy (and other programming), claiming "Allen’s] statement made me so angry, all of us so angry. Comedy is not assembled, it’s not like putting together a boy band where you put together one of this, one of that everyone is represented.” Yet Monty Python was an assemblage of people who sort of got on sometimes and mucked around trying different things. Privilege personified. . I'd probably agree with him, money and resources by the BBC should go to the most deserving regardless of colour or background. I'm presuming Monty python made it on merit of talent and not on whether they were "privileged" or not" They were a flop when they first started. They were invited to experiment by their Oxbridge contacts. All the BBC said was that they want to reflect the country and the talents that have not been given a chance. Nothing about those given a chance not earning it. But, Gilliam chose to respond to that by saying he now describes himself as a Black lesbian. Cleese responded that they were very diverse for the time.  Alternative, yes. Diverse...?
I love(d) Monty Python but his attitude stinks and it's essentially saying that others should not be given the indulgence they had. I'm really saddened by that.
I've also been saddened hearing grammar school boys (it has been all men) who have done well complaining about the admittance of what they consider lower class people to roles on screen and in journalism.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Were all free to give away as much of our money as we like, it's the beautiful thing of living in a free county, of course most people don't mind helping out those in desperate need, but there's always limits to everything. I'm not talking about money. Where's the money element in recognising a trans person as they identify themselves? Where's the money for Gilliam denying people the chance he and the other Pythons were given? . You'll have to run that by me again!. What has Terry Gilliam been given that he's now denying others? The Monty Python crew were given carte blanche and BBC resources to create whatever they wanted to. When the series first came out it didn't do very well. They were then indulged to make another one and it took off and, as we know, the four series' have become classics. He has objected to the BBC giving minorities the chance to make comedy (and other programming), claiming "Allen’s] statement made me so angry, all of us so angry. Comedy is not assembled, it’s not like putting together a boy band where you put together one of this, one of that everyone is represented.” Yet Monty Python was an assemblage of people who sort of got on sometimes and mucked around trying different things. Privilege personified. . I'd probably agree with him, money and resources by the BBC should go to the most deserving regardless of colour or background. I'm presuming Monty python made it on merit of talent and not on whether they were "privileged" or not They were a flop when they first started. They were invited to experiment by their Oxbridge contacts. All the BBC said was that they want to reflect the country and the talents that have not been given a chance. Nothing about those given a chance not earning it. But, Gilliam chose to respond to that by saying he now describes himself as a Black lesbian. Cleese responded that they were very diverse for the time. Alternative, yes. Diverse...?
I love(d) Monty Python but his attitude stinks and it's essentially saying that others should not be given the indulgence they had. I'm really saddened by that.
I've also been saddened hearing grammar school boys (it has been all men) who have done well complaining about the admittance of what they consider lower class people to roles on screen and in journalism.
". Being an initial "flop" is actually not really a good test of talent!. Many many acts didn't work out at first viewing. If the BBC was to "reflect" the country in reality I suspect there'd get hauled over the coals for not having enough black/immigrants/gays on. I don't understand there statement about talent that's not been given a chance though to be honest, what are they trying to infer? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They were a flop when they first started. They were invited to experiment by their Oxbridge contacts. All the BBC said was that they want to reflect the country and the talents that have not been given a chance. Nothing about those given a chance not earning it. But, Gilliam chose to respond to that by saying he now describes himself as a Black lesbian. Cleese responded that they were very diverse for the time. Alternative, yes. Diverse...?
I love(d) Monty Python but his attitude stinks and it's essentially saying that others should not be given the indulgence they had. I'm really saddened by that.
I've also been saddened hearing grammar school boys (it has been all men) who have done well complaining about the admittance of what they consider lower class people to roles on screen and in journalism.
.
Being an initial "flop" is actually not really a good test of talent!.
Many many acts didn't work out at first viewing.
If the BBC was to "reflect" the country in reality I suspect there'd get hauled over the coals for not having enough black/immigrants/gays on.
I don't understand there statement about talent that's not been given a chance though to be honest, what are they trying to infer?"Past practice has largely been that commissioners commissioned who they knew and who those people knew. If your circles are narrow then others don't get in, no matter how talented they are. They are simply opening the possibility for many to try and get the very few slots that are available. They are also taking the view that flops can sometimes turn into successes. Different production companies are getting a shot at meeting commissioners and commissioners have been told to look at diversity. It is still very recent, but the first stage was already in place with putting new and riskier things on BBC3, which is online/iPlayer only. If it does well it might appear late night on BBC1 or 2. If those do well then it might get another commission. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Past practice has largely been that commissioners commissioned who they knew and who those people knew. If your circles are narrow then others don't get in, no matter how talented they are. They are simply opening the possibility for many to try and get the very few slots that are available. They are also taking the view that flops can sometimes turn into successes. Different production companies are getting a shot at meeting commissioners and commissioners have been told to look at diversity. It is still very recent, but the first stage was already in place with putting new and riskier things on BBC3, which is online/iPlayer only. If it does well it might appear late night on BBC1 or 2. If those do well then it might get another commission. " . Well I'm glad that past practices are now gone and people make it on merit and not who they know but I'm not happy at commissioners being told to look at diversity (although hes a great dancer  ).
It smacks of the bad old days of discrimination | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
