 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 01 Jul 18 - 04:51 AM Time to re-start the 'Song Challenge' threads? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 01 Jul 18 - 04:50 AM Thanks Jack, I'd already read that in the papers. Someone hotfooting it to the doctors, following an attempt to start 'upskirting'. I suppose upskirting is a form of 'assault', but I didn't realise 'battery' came into it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Jack Campin Date: 29 Jun 18 - 09:47 AM Upskirter tries for a Darwin Award |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Jun 18 - 12:06 PM of course, it could have been spelled 'tail' if I wasn't so hot and distracted by discomfort... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Jun 18 - 12:04 PM 'catastrophe' - now there's a word that can be twisted for childish merriment... even better if you're brave enough to have a stuffed cat arse with tale fixed bolt upright in surprise, mounted on a plaque above the fire place... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Mr Red Date: 28 Jun 18 - 03:11 AM Or in your case - Stevo Apostrophes' You weren't a grocer in a former life were you? just giving you A POST TROPHY Ho, ho, ho - oh my sides ache |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Senoufou Date: 27 Jun 18 - 04:11 AM You're right Nigel. On the outside! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Jun 18 - 03:56 AM PLEASE don't get me started again on the misuse of apostrophe's... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Mr Red Date: 27 Jun 18 - 03:36 AM Steve Shaw I think the correct artistic description for your little poem would be: Apostrohpe. All I can add is: Fool Stop! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 27 Jun 18 - 03:34 AM Eliza: I told my husband he should walk on my right when we're on the pavement. He asked why? I said it was to protect me from mud splashes from passing carriages and to keep his sword hand free in case we were attacked. He gave me a withering look and said, "You Toubaboo are all completely bonkers!" I always heard it as 'walk on the outside' (rather than the 'right'), but with the same reasons, or "so that he can spit in the gutter". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Senoufou Date: 26 Jun 18 - 12:37 PM I told my husband he should walk on my right when we're on the pavement. He asked why? I said it was to protect me from mud splashes from passing carriages and to keep his sword hand free in case we were attacked. He gave me a withering look and said, "You Toubaboo are all completely bonkers!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Jun 18 - 11:13 AM Aren't you supposed to precede a lady going upstairs and follow her going downstairs? From one of those Naked Gun films as Frank Drebin watches Jane going upstairs past a case containing a stuffed animal: Drebin: " Nice beaver!" Jane: "Thank you!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 26 Jun 18 - 10:59 AM Once again Steve Shaw believes he knows better than I do what I intended to post when I posted it. Teachers' standards are clearly declining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 26 Jun 18 - 10:48 AM I am led to believe that it was a chargeable offence for a kilted serviceman to go upstairs on a tram or bus I'm sure someone will contradict me if im wrong |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Jun 18 - 10:42 AM You're only saying that because you neglected to put one in. The Parliament website disagrees with you, as does Wikipedia. And so do I. The lack of an apostrophe there denotes illiteracy, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 26 Jun 18 - 09:26 AM I don't have the foggiest what Shaw is on about now. My comment was: "Private members bill" - how apt ;) It's a parliamentary bill concerning 'private members'. No requirement for a possessive pronoun apostrophe anywhere in that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Jun 18 - 08:46 AM Private members bill? Private members bills? Private member's bill? Private member's bills? Private members' bill? Private members' bills? Hang on, I think I've got it: Private members' bill's! ....Nigel? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Dave the Gnome Date: 26 Jun 18 - 08:34 AM What about private Bill's member? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 26 Jun 18 - 05:30 AM Indeed, Red. As was previously pointed out (by Howard, if memory serves), PMB's aren't necessarily intended to enact legislation, but also simply to draw attention to things that might otherwise not get any parliament time at all. That governments use PMBs for their own purposes & therefore eat into backbenchers' time is part of Chope's reasons for objecting (& I'll say it again for the hard of comprehension, I've no opinion on whether or not it's right that MPs can object in this fashion). And I've managed to avoid saying anything about 'back doors!' Ooooops! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 26 Jun 18 - 03:53 AM "Private members bill" - how apt ;) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Mr Red Date: 26 Jun 18 - 03:22 AM Last I read this will become a scheduled debate. Which has more chance of being set out properly and given enough time to be made a usable statute. Private Members' Bills are not given enough time to debate fully and more likely were designed to introduce the concept to parliament and test the strength of feeling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Jun 18 - 02:59 AM Hey, Joe, you've just turned my post into a head-scratcher!
I thought I changed my post before anybody saw what I said. Guess I got caught with my pants down. Er, maybe I'd better not go there. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Jun 18 - 02:50 AM Are you suggesting that upkilting could be used to have an illicit gander at the gander? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Jun 18 - 02:39 AM Dang, Donuel, could it possibly be that you're, like, seriously off topic? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Donuel Date: 25 Jun 18 - 08:25 PM Meanwhile back on the American ranch, America calls for abolising Due Process. Without judges and a President who says I Am The Law, The Constitution is ignored and International humanitarian rights are violated. Combined with a Trade War the stage is set for WWIII after a great depression. I wont get into the weeds with the Smoot Hawley Act but things are worse than they seem. So here comes the great sell off which will enable some spculators to buy back at low prices. If the slide stops. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 25 Jun 18 - 06:07 PM Poor Radweld... :-) Incidentally, I don't recall ever mentioning a "camel train." What's one of them when it's at 'ome? Now a camel TOE...that's different. But let's not go there. Probably... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 25 Jun 18 - 04:42 PM Sorry, Nigel, I'm afraid that one completely passes me by! The glide from 'trail' to 'train', I get, but if a camel train is anything except, errr, a train of camels, you've lost me. I must not be grown up enough to understand. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Nigel Parsons Date: 25 Jun 18 - 03:55 PM Raedwulf: Be fair, he's not totally off-topic. He did start talking about the "camel train". I assume that links in with "upskirting". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 25 Jun 18 - 02:29 PM Et Voila! Only this was wanting to complete the Shaw the Pompous cabaret. We began with a piece of patronising trolling (there's another label for you to add to your list, Shaw - troll) that had nothing at all to do with the thread (I may have treated it as humorous, but I don't believe that was ever your intention), quickly followed by sniffy, snotty squealing when his jibe was good-humouredly turned back against him. Now, we get Mother Superior Stevie delivering a condescending lecture, as though she didn't start this childish contretemps. And then we get the totally irrelevant aside to try to reinforce the notion that calm, sensible, happy, grown up Stevie has been doing calm, sensible, happy, grown up stuff & this is really nothing to do with her at all... Bollocks, Shaw. No-one's buying it, no-one's agreeing with you (sorry, I forgot; in Shaw World, that means everyone else is wrong...). You started this whole thing. If you really believe you're not as guilty of all the labels you're trying to stick on me, you're a fool & I pity you. Otherwise, you're dishonest & contemptible. Either way, I am now sitting here laughing at you, you pathetic old fool. Grow up? After you. Dear. I'll do it when you do. How long does the rest of Mudcat have to wait for that to happen, I wonder? My sole regret about this is that there have been two or three previous occasions when I'd have been perfectly justified in throwing your dud ammo back at you, but I couldn't be bothered then. And I suspect there are quite a few people who feel like that about you. I've no idea what you think you're achieving, but you most certainly have demonstrated that you absolutely are a complete arse at times. I'm not in the least bit bothered what people think of me. I'm intelligent enough to know what I'm doing, I'm honest enough to admit to it, and I've explained to any poor sod who wanders into this thread exactly why I'm doing it. I doubt I've 'won' anything, but you've very definitely lost something. Dear. Don't like it, can't take it? Don't do it, don't try dishing it out. In future, be polite, little Stevie, and play nice (which, again, you mostly do). If you can't or won't, don't snivel when someone treats you as you treat others. It's long overdue that someone talked back to you in your own fashion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Senoufou Date: 25 Jun 18 - 01:53 PM Women should wear a 'pagne'. I always do when in Africa. It fits anyone (one merely wraps it round and ties it) It's full-length but not flappy. Completely impossible to upskirt in any way. Keeps the mozzies off one's legs. Prevents sunburn ditto. Jolly colours and designs. Highly recommended. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: punkfolkrocker Date: 25 Jun 18 - 01:51 PM curtsying.... she looks even more like John Cleese... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: mayomick Date: 25 Jun 18 - 01:20 PM Here's a link to Ms May curtsying .I hadn't realised that sort of thing still went on in the UK . https://www.google.ie/search?q=theresa+may+curtsy&num=50&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwicooX1qO_bAhWKHsAKHR_cAowQ_AUICigB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: mayomick Date: 25 Jun 18 - 01:15 PM Did anyone see the pic of Theresa May performing her democratic duties that's currently doing the rounds on facebook ? It was Ms May recommended Chote for a knighthood, I believe. Maybe she feared that Sir Christopher was lurking somewhere with his camera ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: DMcG Date: 25 Jun 18 - 12:06 PM And as proof, As a child I once won a prize from 'The Viewer' TV guide to watch a Mr Pastry recording. And, to bring the whole thing back to music, it was a question about "The Blaydon Races", which The Viewer used as an advertising theme tune. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: punkfolkrocker Date: 25 Jun 18 - 12:01 PM You just can't predict where these threads will lead... I just spent 10 minutes watching for Mr Pastry clips on youtube... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Dave the Gnome Date: 25 Jun 18 - 11:40 AM They could host pasty parties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 18 - 07:42 PM Chough bakery don't hold parties on their Grade One listed premises but they do make pasties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 18 - 06:39 PM "Radweld." Nice one, Dave! Move swiftly on, Radweldwulf. One day when you've grown up you'll realise that this stuff is absolutely not worth it,and you'll absolutely HATE reading back your posts in this thread. I've had a lovely day today, cycling on the Camel Trail in the summer sun, wearing a pair of Bellwether cycling shorts (with chamois stitched-in gusset, natch) that did the job beautifully thirty years ago but which now afford the lovely ladies of Padstow and Wadebridge the chance to "upshort" me with next to no effort (I dress to the left, so any revenge-porn pics you see of me in those shorts dressing to the right are fakes, I tell you). And why wouldn't they. It's a charity ride/walk that we do every year. Part of the ritual is to have a Chough bakery party in Padstow before we set off back to Wadebridge. There is no finer pasty on the planet. The weather was gorgeous and the air was clear. Oh for a lark in the clear air! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 24 Jun 18 - 06:20 PM So now I know what your excuse is... Wait! That's my excuse! Give it back!! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 18 - 06:12 PM Mad as a box o' frogs. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 24 Jun 18 - 05:25 PM Cor, someone needs to go on an anger management course! :-) Who's that, then, Steve? Not me. I get angry so rarely, I can't remember the last time I did. Certainly not sat at a keyboard - too much time to think & clam, errr, calm down, dear! ;-) That I wax eloquent (and I do!) doesn't indicate how I feel. I'd say I'm sat here laughing at you, except that isn't true either. It's just long overdue that someone stood up to you when you decide to start being an obnoxious antagonistic bastard (go on Steve, explain the 15/6 post - if it was supposed to be funny, why did you get the arsehole at my response; if it wasn't intended to be humorous, then what was the intent? Get out of that one without moving! ;-) ). I don't expect anything I've said will make a great deal of difference to you, if it actually has any effect at all. But if you weren't aware that there are other MM's who do see you in terms of the labels I suggested, you know now. And if you did know, then you're just another internet bully. And I loathe bullying, Steve. I don't believe you are one, I seem to remember you've also expressed a similar revulsion ere now. But have a think, eh? I haven't said what I've said without feeling that I have reason to do so. Dear! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 18 - 07:25 AM Well, with friends like you... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: bobad Date: 24 Jun 18 - 06:26 AM Raedwulf hit the bull's eye. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 18 - 05:44 AM Cor, someone needs to go on an anger management course! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Jun 18 - 04:24 AM Could be 'strain your bank' as well:-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 23 Jun 18 - 02:53 PM You want my bank details, Dave? Really? Well... OK, good luck with my overdraft... :o As I said to a mate down to the pub yesterday lunchtime when he announced he was off to pick up some money, "Make sure it's not more than 50 pound or you might strain yer back!" ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jun 18 - 01:37 PM Listen here, Radweld. It's no good going on about Steve not being humourous while you are because it is obvious, to me anyway, that you both use exaggerated invective to good effect. And do you really believe for one minute that Chope was trying to help anyone but himself? If so, I have some shares that you will be interested in. Just send me your bank details... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Donuel Date: 23 Jun 18 - 01:24 PM I too object to badly written, poorly debated, insufficiently scrutinised law. Steve is self appointed as the ego commander and chief. He is unable to even visualize the dissolution of ego in relation to thinking. So do not be desuaded in the face of weaponized ego bosses. The ego is not the boss. And that goes for you too. Don't let your ego boss you around. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: Raedwulf Date: 23 Jun 18 - 01:15 PM Shan't argue with that, pfr. Not least because language does what it will, and whilst we may sigh about changes, railing against them is pointless (I'm sure there are jokes, or puns at least, in there, but I'll forego the dubious privilege!). The sad thing about the c-word is it's actually a really good word. The 'cun' is the same cun as in cunning. As in cyning (pronounced 'cooning') that is the A/S original of king. Examine the German (Koenig), Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, etc. They're all the same word, basically. And, so the author Kathleen Herbert told me years ago, it's all bound up in the notion of wisdom & 'secret' wisdom, hence the sexual slang from the notion of female wisdom, intuition, etc. I don't know whether she was right, but her A/S was a lot better than mine is! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Object!' (Upskirting) From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 18 - 12:26 PM Well... fair and reasonable or not... I'd like "to chope, what a chope, choping, choped, etc - any or other variants" to enter common usage...... because I'd like a new good sounding swear word to substitute for an overused and misused favourite. If 'chope' were to take off, 'c@nt' could now really be reserved only for special occasions... |
