|
|
Post by graham on Jul 13, 2023 19:21:04 GMT
There has been much discussion of sexual behaviour in recent days for perhaps obvious reasons. If I may raise a somewhat different issue which arose at my U3A class earlier today. I made the point that back in the 70s and 80s there was no way that my parents would have permitted myself or my siblings to sleep in their family home with girlfriends or boyfriends. We went on to discuss how far that would still be the line taken by parents nowadays. We did not really arrive at a concensus view - beyond the suggestion that age could well be a factor - ie a couple in a relationship in their mid-30s might be more readily allowed to sleep together than - say - teenagers or couples in their early 20s. I took the simple view that parents have every right to impose their own moral standards within their own homes. I would assume that most parents today would allow their adult children to stay overnight with partners. Safer at home than elsewhere IMO. A lady in the group - born in 1948 - recounted her experience as a university student in the late 60s. She was in a relationship with the guy who was to become her husband, and she approached her GP seeking the contraceptive pill. She was taken aback by his suggestion that she should 'get married.' She also revealed that by this time she was living with her boyfriend - which rather surprised me because in my experience cohabiting - or 'living in sin' - did not become socially acceptable until a decade later - ie the late 70s. It would have been widely frowned upon in the late 60s.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 13, 2023 19:31:41 GMT
grahamWas she from that there London? Funny lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jul 13, 2023 19:34:08 GMT
graham Was she from that there London? Funny lot. No - North of England and Scotland. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jul 13, 2023 19:49:53 GMT
There has been much discussion of sexual behaviour in recent days for perhaps obvious reasons. If I may raise a somewhat different issue which arose at my U3A class earlier today. I made the point that back in the 70s and 80s there was no way that my parents would have permitted myself or my siblings to sleep in their family home with girlfriends or boyfriends. We went on to discuss how far that would still be the line taken by parents nowadays. We did not really arrive at a concensus view - beyond the suggestion that age could well be a factor - ie a couple in a relationship in their mid-30s might be more readily allowed to sleep together than - say - teenagers or couples in their early 20s. I took the simple view that parents have every right to impose their own moral standards within their own homes. I would assume that most parents today would allow their adult children to stay overnight with partners. Safer at home than elsewhere IMO. Well yes. The trickier issue is with 16 year olds (plus or minus a year or two). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2023 19:51:32 GMT
In what can only be considered a case of karma it seems "Dan Wooton " is now trending on twitter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2023 19:55:32 GMT
It seems he's been accused of being a serial sex pest by a former boyfriend.
Let's see if this makes the front page of the Sun for five days in a row
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jul 13, 2023 19:57:35 GMT
I would assume that most parents today would allow their adult children to stay overnight with partners. Safer at home than elsewhere IMO. Well yes. The trickier issue is with 16 year olds (plus or minus a year or two). But I am sure there are still many parents who would not wish to allow fornication within their homes - even when those involved were young adults. If I had brought home a steady girlfriend at the age of 30 in the mid- 80s, no way would I have expected to share the same bedroom. Beyond that people tended not to want to formally admit to parents that they were engaging in premarital sex.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 13, 2023 20:03:34 GMT
A reminder of Sunak's 5 pledges Inflation - halve inflation this year -Very unlikely Growing the economy - the economy is stagnating Refuce the National debt - It's getting bigger Falling NHS waiting lists - They're getting longer Stop the boats - record levels this month Sunak asked people to judge him on these pledges, I suspect he won't like the verdict I agree it's not looking good, but I think he did say by the end of the year so there's time for improvement. He was pretty vague on the timing for most of the above (other than #1 which is maybe 50/50 now). I look forward to UK inflation dropping below EU inflation later this year given that I understand 'base effects' and how UK dealt with Energy prices differently to 'aggregate' EU/US/etc. As for the others then we'll have a GE in late 2024 (which is more than year) Also, whilst I don't want to be a pendant and I'm very glad people are putting focus on #5, then WRT to "record levels" then 22 Aug'22 was the record daily number at 1,295* and July'23 (so far) is similar to July'22* (but of course people can cherry pick specific dates, drop the context of "record" and basically talk bollocks if they want to - something that is very 'RUK-ish' IMO) Of course we don't have access to the parallel universes to see if numbers would be even worse if we hadn't paid France to do what we hope they are doing with British taxpayer ££ (data on that suggests they are making a bit of difference). However, I'm very happy to agree with anyone and everyone that Rishi-Braverman are certainly failing to 'Stop the Boats' and would again thank LAB MPs (like Kinnock) and everyone else who is pointing out that CON HMG need to deliver and get a grip on illegal immigration. * www.gov.uk/government/statistics/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-monthly-data/monthly-number-of-migrants-detected-in-small-boats-1-august-to-31-august-2022** They've moved the data around a bit and I appreciate some people are very lazy but below is the weekly data link and I'll make the outrageous assumption that people can use the link above to check July'22: www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-daysPS I apologies for sourcing data. I appreciate a lot of people can't be bothered with that and prefer to regurgitate whatever they read on 'twitter' and/or hope no one will bother to check their fabricated nonsense (and I'm long past ignoring the fabricated, unsourced, nonsense unless someone I do occasionally read has commented on it) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 13, 2023 20:15:01 GMT
For some unfathomable reason, UKPR2 appears to have an array of experts in the most unlikely and unnecessary fields. If only these poor individuals had had polls and politics and dare I say cricket to fill their Internet lives then maybe they wouldn't have found themselves in such a pickle. I assume RAF was being ironic and/or sarcastic. I admit to not being an expert in the difference being irony and sarcasm  Although I'd certainly agree with "unnecessary" (irrelevant) WRT to stuff like cricket and whatever some BBC chap has been doing. Fortunately I don't read that many posts on UKPR2 but, based on previous experience, I expect a lot of protesting/commenting about other people protesting/commenting - without any self-awareness that it is the protesting/commenting that keeps an unnecessary/irrelevant zzz ZZZ going (something that journos for various rags exploit to the fullest extent) PS At least you didn't mention Covid or Brexit. Thankfully most people have moved on from those two subjects now they have no polling relevance - or at least only post "unnecessary"/(irrelevant to polling) stuff on the Issue Specific threads where those who are still interested can continue their discussions. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 13, 2023 20:24:57 GMT
Unfortunately YG didn't give an option for "I really don't give a shit, there is a lot more vastly important stuff going on". However, since the press (and probably a lot of the denizens on UKPR2) seem obsessed then FWIW:
?
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,357
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Jul 13, 2023 20:35:40 GMT
Did Sunak mention something about having 'integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level' www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/13/rishi-sunak-changes-declaration-again-over-private-jet-travel-expensesRishi Sunak has changed his expenses declaration over the funding of private jet travel to Tory events after questions were raised about why they were recorded as coming from a small company linked to a multimillionaire businessman. Sunak’s latest declaration now names the donor of £38,500 to pay for air travel by the prime minister and staff as Akhil Tripathi, a British-Indian medical tech entrepreneur who made a fortune from an anti-snoring device. The change is the third time that the declaration has been updated by the prime minister and comes after Labour wrote to two standards watchdogs to ask if any rules had been broken over declarations of more than £88,000 over the past eight months for air travel by the prime minister and direct funding to the Tory party." |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 13, 2023 20:37:23 GMT
I would assume that most parents today would allow their adult children to stay overnight with partners. Safer at home than elsewhere IMO. Well yes. The trickier issue is with 16 year olds (plus or minus a year or two). Under 16 you would be aiding and abetting a crime, so no to the minus. |
|
|
|
Post by bendo on Jul 13, 2023 20:42:49 GMT
Caveat : I've been out all day, so, this could possibly be out of date, but... Re-the Huw Edwards story. The onl thing we know for certain is that we are far from knowing the whole story. What we do know is that Edwards is alleged to have paid sums of money to a boy, now 20 for mild sexually explicit photos. The boy may or may not have been 17 when the irst photos were sent. As the police are saying no offence to place, the MAN was clearly aged over 18 if any photos were indeed sent. Another case of the scum paper out to ruin lives and evidently succeeding. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jul 13, 2023 20:45:32 GMT
pjw1961 - "If no one had more than two children, and given some people would have one or none, the world population would fall." Not necessarily. It depends on the age of the parents at conception and life expectancy. If you have your two children by 25 and life expectancy is 75, populations will grow, as a couple will have created 2 children by 25, 2 children + 4/2 grandchildren by the time they are 50 and 2 children, 4/2 grandchildren and 8/4 great grandchildren by the time they die at 75. So the population would have gone from 2 to 10 over the couple's lifetime, falling to 8 after they die. Maths could be a bit squiffy there cos I'm drunk, but delaying when you have children is almost as important as how many you have in terms of global populations. Best to have none, in environmental terms. Once you've expanded the human population, recycling, buying green energy or taking one less flight per year is just pissing in the wind. You've already done the damage.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,357
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Jul 13, 2023 20:55:06 GMT
pjw1961 - "If no one had more than two children, and given some people would have one or none, the world population would fall." Not necessarily. It depends on the age of the parents at conception and life expectancy. If you have your two children by 25 and life expectancy is 75, populations will grow, as a couple will have created 2 children by 25, 2 children + 4/2 grandchildren by the time they are 50 and 2 children, 4/2 grandchildren and 8/4 great grandchildren by the time they die at 75. So the population would have gone from 2 to 10 over the couple's lifetime, falling to 8 after they die. Maths could be a bit squiffy there cos I'm drunk, You are leaving out the other half of the equation The new parents will have 2 parents of their own, 4 grand parents and 8 great grandparents, who will also die off |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jul 13, 2023 21:04:57 GMT
neilj - that's why I only allocated half of the offspring to the parents.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 13, 2023 21:10:22 GMT
There's Now a Rapid, Accurate COVID-19 Air Detectortime.com/6294198/covid-19-air-detector/(“ And if other diseases-causing viruses come along, the biosensor can be adjusted to detect those as well. Already, the research team is working on a device that could also identify influenza and RSV.”)
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 13, 2023 21:17:36 GMT
pjw1961 - "If no one had more than two children, and given some people would have one or none, the world population would fall." Not necessarily. It depends on the age of the parents at conception and life expectancy. If you have your two children by 25 and life expectancy is 75, populations will grow, as a couple will have created 2 children by 25, 2 children + 4/2 grandchildren by the time they are 50 and 2 children, 4/2 grandchildren and 8/4 great grandchildren by the time they die at 75. So the population would have gone from 2 to 10 over the couple's lifetime, falling to 8 after they die. Maths could be a bit squiffy there cos I'm drunk, but delaying when you have children is almost as important as how many you have in terms of global populations. Best to have none, in environmental terms. Once you've expanded the human population, recycling, buying green energy or taking one less flight per year is just pissing in the wind. You've already done the damage. The population replacement rate is in excess of 2.0 (I have seen 2.3 quoted in my time but the link I have given says 2.1). Therefore if nobody were to have more than two children the population would certainly fall. This is of course what is happening in Europe, Japan, etc. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7834459/#:~:text=PIP%3A%20Replacement%20level%20fertility%20is,of%202.1%20children%20per%20woman. "PIP: Replacement level fertility is the level of fertility at which a population exactly replaces itself from one generation to the next. In developed countries, replacement level fertility can be taken as requiring an average of 2.1 children per woman. In countries with high infant and child mortality rates, however, the average number of births may need to be much higher." |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 13, 2023 21:24:33 GMT
Did Sunak mention something about having 'integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level' www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/13/rishi-sunak-changes-declaration-again-over-private-jet-travel-expensesRishi Sunak has changed his expenses declaration over the funding of private jet travel to Tory events after questions were raised about why they were recorded as coming from a small company linked to a multimillionaire businessman. Sunak’s latest declaration now names the donor of £38,500 to pay for air travel by the prime minister and staff as Akhil Tripathi, a British-Indian medical tech entrepreneur who made a fortune from an anti-snoring device. The change is the third time that the declaration has been updated by the prime minister and comes after Labour wrote to two standards watchdogs to ask if any rules had been broken over declarations of more than £88,000 over the past eight months for air travel by the prime minister and direct funding to the Tory party." What are the odds on Lord Tripathi in the next honours list? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,614
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 13, 2023 21:51:47 GMT
Gina Miller who was consistently right about Brexit believes that if there was the political will to rejoin the European union the actual process could be completed in three years. Promising all we need is a Labour party who puts the national interest first, the public support is already there. youtu.be/1zAkR4jmLeM |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 13, 2023 22:41:07 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Jul 13, 2023 22:46:03 GMT
Well yes. The trickier issue is with 16 year olds (plus or minus a year or two). Under 16 you would be aiding and abetting a crime, so no to the minus. That doesnt really change the problem. Many children are paedophiles (well duh, obviously), and their teachers know it and ignore it. The best solution might well be dont ask, dont tell. Most people would not be as stupid as Jack Straw and hand in their own kids for criminality.(though possibily he knew the press were on to it anyway) Oh, and i understood one justification for having a law banning under age sex was that the police would never prosecute in a situation of consenting minors anyway. If that isnt true, then the law becomes even more of an ass than it appears to be. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Jul 13, 2023 22:52:24 GMT
There's Now a Rapid, Accurate COVID-19 Air Detectortime.com/6294198/covid-19-air-detector/(“ And if other diseases-causing viruses come along, the biosensor can be adjusted to detect those as well. Already, the research team is working on a device that could also identify influenza and RSV.”) Should make someone some more money.... Which operations shall we cancel in the NHS to buy some? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,614
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 13, 2023 22:55:12 GMT
mercianHave you been looking somewhere else when the plethora of polls supporting rejoin have been published with across party support. What's the relevance of your comment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2023 23:08:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 13, 2023 23:16:57 GMT
steveThe relevance is that Gina Miller is irrelevant. There might be polling support for rejoin, but it won't happen for years if ever and it's very low on most people's priority list (apart from the League of EU Loyalists on this forum). As I think someone else said, bin collections are an important issue for most people. Rejoining the EU is much lower down the list.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2023 23:50:11 GMT
Getting away from politics for a moment, I've just been watching the first episode of Catherine Tate's new comedy series "Queen of Oz" on iplayer. www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0fkxfwl/queen-of-oz-series-1-episode-1While it's not the best thing she has done, it is funny in parts, and worth watching. But what the reviewers don't seem to have recognised is how much it is a satire on Prince Harry. First, she has an older brother (the heir to the throne); she is ginger (in reality close to her natural hair colour) and has an past filled with faux pas. The opening scene is brilliant and the idea of the Queen, abdicating as ruler of Australia and making her Queen to deal with a Republican-inclined Prime Minister and a Murdoch-like media baron as a make-or-break move, is just believable. If I'm being critical, the supporting parts are underwritten and her Georgiana character leans too much on her previous Nan, but Catherine Tate is always better than no Catherine Tate. Absolutely. Lots of satire in there and well-constructed story lines. Have watched the whole thing on iPlayer and found it unusual from the perspective of the premise, but absorbing and, regularly, hilarious. I particularly like Georgie's interaction with the Republican Prime Minister. Fawlty Towers it ain't, but I've seen much worse 'comedy'. I'm not the greatest Catherine Tate fan, but this is the best original comedy I've seen for a while. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,614
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 14, 2023 6:02:52 GMT
Sky uncovers those mps with their snouts furthest into trough of second incomes , excluding those who have had second political jobs, such as Dan Jarvis , it comes as no surprise at all which party produces virtually all of the major earners. youtu.be/8wTqMO_Jy_U |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,614
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 14, 2023 6:10:08 GMT
mercian People's financial position is at the top, the brexitanians lied in their campaign arguing that the UK would be better off out of the European union, the reality confirms the lie. A case made based on the fact that we would be better off back in the European union resonates with people's primary concerns. It's just that currently no party is making this case with the exception of the SNP either loudly enough in my parties case or at all in the leadership of Labour. Reality won't change leadership positions can. Incidentally for decades our membership of the European union wasn't in the top ten concerns of the public until brexitanian tax haven fans and nationalist bigots backed by their media mouthpieces made it higher profile.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisc on Jul 14, 2023 7:11:22 GMT
pjw1961 - "If no one had more than two children, and given some people would have one or none, the world population would fall." Not necessarily. It depends on the age of the parents at conception and life expectancy. If you have your two children by 25 and life expectancy is 75, populations will grow, as a couple will have created 2 children by 25, 2 children + 4/2 grandchildren by the time they are 50 and 2 children, 4/2 grandchildren and 8/4 great grandchildren by the time they die at 75. So the population would have gone from 2 to 10 over the couple's lifetime, falling to 8 after they die. Maths could be a bit squiffy there cos I'm drunk, You are leaving out the other half of the equation The new parents will have 2 parents of their own, 4 grand parents and 8 great grandparents, who will also die off |
|
