‘Lunch breaks are for wimps’ & sandwiches are not real food…

[Ammi]

Lunch breaks are for wimps, says Kemi Badenoch…

Kemi Badenoch has said lunch breaks are “for wimps”.

The Conservative leader revealed she brings in food to the office and eats while getting on with her work because “there is no time”.

She used a line from Wall Street’s Gordon Gekko when explaining that she does not spend time away from her desk for a midday meal.

Gekko, played by Michael Douglas in the 1987 film set in the world of New York corporate finance, famously declared: “Lunch is for wimps.” He was also known for the quote: “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.”

Mrs Badenoch also declared that she did not believe that sandwiches were a “real food” and that she “would not touch bread if it’s moist”.

Her revelations come after she was criticised during the summer for not attending hustings to spend time with her family.

Criticism over children

Christopher Chope, a Tory MP, sparked controversy when he said she was “too preoccupied with her children” to be leader of the opposition.

Asked about her down time since becoming leader, Mrs Badenoch told The Spectator: “What’s decompressing, what’s that? What’s a lunch break? Lunch is for wimps.

“I have food brought in and I work and eat at the same time. There’s no time.”

The Conservative Party leader, who worked at The Spectator before leaving in 2016, also revealed some of her lunch preferences, expressing a distaste for sandwiches.

In her interview with the magazine’s new editor, Michael Gove, and Katy Balls, its political editor, she said: “Sometimes I will get a steak... I’m not a sandwich person.

“I don’t think sandwiches are a real food, it’s what you have for breakfast. I will not touch bread if it’s moist.”

Mrs Badenoch became the leader of the Tories in November, after a lengthy leadership contest in which she ultimately beat her nearest rival Robert Jenrick, now her shadow justice secretary.

She put the embrace of capitalism at the centre of her pitch, and said that it should no longer be considered a “dirty word”.

The former business secretary became embroiled in a row over whether or not maternity pay was set at the right level for businesses, after suggesting that it was “excessive”.

Mrs Badenoch is said to have quit her job at The Spectator in 2016 because she felt it would be “unfair” to keep the post open while she went on maternity leave to have her second child.

She also joked during the interview for the Christmas edition of the Spectator that anybody who puts decorations up before 1 December “should be fined”.

“That’s my ban!” she added.

The Tory leader went on to criticise Sir Keir Starmer for revealing that he might watch Love Actually over the festive period, as she believed that the film has “quite a lot of dark undertones”.

“There is a British prime minister who’s messing around and is not doing the foreign policy properly, people are cheating and there is a lot going on there if you move away from the smiley, happy, cheesy stuff,” she said, adding that she prefers watching Die Hard.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/kemi-badenoch-says-sandwiches-not-100933336.html

[Crimson Dynamo]

im sure she said this in jest and frankly I would not expect the PM to have a lunch break tbh

[Liam-]

She’s the gift that keeps on giving

[Ray.]

Well that'll endear her to the common worker, I'm sure.

[bots]

it may have been a joke, but having worked in the city, i've experienced people glaring as our squad headed out to the pub for lunch and i know who was happier at the end of the day :laugh:

[Cherie]

it may have been a joke, but having worked in the city, i've experienced people glaring as our squad headed out to the pub for lunch and i know who was happier at the end of the day :laugh:

Those were the days pub lunchs and back to the office afterwards :laugh: wonder if that still happens

[Cherie]

If Kemi were on the left, anyone criticising her would be called racist, that said she is terrible at PMQs :laugh:

[bots]

Kemi won't be leader next year

[Beso]

Pick up your steak for lunch, and jump in my get to **** bin alongside starmer.

Its reform for me from here on in.

[arista]

im sure she said this in jest and frankly I would not expect the PM to have a lunch break tbh

Of course
I would not make a thread on this


Had to be a Pigeon
pecking at this.

[Niamh.]

Of course
I would not make a thread on this


Had to be a Pigeon
pecking at this.

Always trying to ruffle a few feathers that one :oh:

[bots]

it's a load of guano.....

[Crimson Dynamo]

I had a homing Pigeon once

I sold it 24 times

[arista]

I had a homing Pigeon once

I sold it 24 times


clever buggers

[Glenn.]

She’s lovely isn’t she

[Crimson Dynamo]

She’s lovely isn’t she

https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd1e00ek4ebabms.cloudfront.net%2Fprod uction%2Fc0358da8-6aa8-4f1f-850f-98b65eda8fd3.jpg?source=next-article&fit=scale-down&quality=highest&width=700&dpr=1

[Ammi]

Of course
I would not make a thread on this


Had to be a Pigeon
pecking at this.

…:laugh:…it’s good to chirp in with a thread now and again, sir…

[Oliver_W]

#LetThemEatSteak

[Vanessa]

Lunch breaks are very important. We always take them.

[The Slim Reaper]

If Kemi were on the left, anyone criticising her would be called racist, that said she is terrible at PMQs :laugh:

Didn't you used to say you were a labour voter? :laugh:

That's not true, is it now? David Lammy is criticised more by the left than by weirdo centrists or the right, so there's that.

[Cherie]

Didn't you used to say you were a labour voter? :laugh:

That's not true, is it now? David Lammy is criticised more by the left than by weirdo centrists or the right, so there's that.

Nope, I have voted Labour in the past but I wouldn't say I have been a consistent Labour voter, I have voted Lib Dem, Independent and spoiled my vote so what would YOU call that seeing as you know so much about me, also I voted to REMAIN,I know you decided because you like to pigeon hole everyone that I voted to leave :hee:

[Cherie]

Also what is so weird about being on the centre?

[Beso]

Also what is so weird about being on the centre?

Said the Rose's hazelnut and caramel to the Rose's caramel.

Sorry, I've been eating Rosie's today.

[The Slim Reaper]

Also what is so weird about being on the centre?

Because it's not really a true ideology. The centre basically always capitulates to the right, but they just don't want to admit they love the cruelty.

[The Slim Reaper]

Nope, I have voted Labour in the past but I wouldn't say I have been a consistent Labour voter, I have voted Lib Dem, Independent and spoiled my vote so what would YOU call that seeing as you know so much about me, also I voted to REMAIN,I know you decided because you like to pigeon hole everyone that I voted to leave :hee:

Difficult to try and decipher what you mean here, because this post is verging on incoherent, but the bit in bold is not true. I've never said you voted leave. And I can't pigeon hole you to other people. Complete nonsense.

How have you deduced that I believe I know so much about you? I just remember you saying previously you were a labour voter, but it's going to be from years ago, so I could easily be completely misremembering, which is why I posed it as a question, rather than a definitive statement.

[Beso]

You posed it as a question, then added the sniggering smiley.

[The Slim Reaper]

Sniggering smiley

If I'd wanted it to be a gotcha, I could have used the search function.

[arista]

…:laugh:…it’s good to chirp in with a thread now and again, sir…


https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/lc-images-sky/lcimg-531fb112-cc49-4ab2-bb16-becb42d9c2db.png

[arista]

https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/lc-images-sky/lcimg-d2e879d6-e2f6-458a-af3a-7aba57071d9b.png

[Mystic Mock]

Lunch breaks are for wimps, says Kemi Badenoch…

Kemi Badenoch has said lunch breaks are “for wimps”.

The Conservative leader revealed she brings in food to the office and eats while getting on with her work because “there is no time”.

She used a line from Wall Street’s Gordon Gekko when explaining that she does not spend time away from her desk for a midday meal.

Gekko, played by Michael Douglas in the 1987 film set in the world of New York corporate finance, famously declared: “Lunch is for wimps.” He was also known for the quote: “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.”

Mrs Badenoch also declared that she did not believe that sandwiches were a “real food” and that she “would not touch bread if it’s moist”.

Her revelations come after she was criticised during the summer for not attending hustings to spend time with her family.

Criticism over children

Christopher Chope, a Tory MP, sparked controversy when he said she was “too preoccupied with her children” to be leader of the opposition.

Asked about her down time since becoming leader, Mrs Badenoch told The Spectator: “What’s decompressing, what’s that? What’s a lunch break? Lunch is for wimps.

“I have food brought in and I work and eat at the same time. There’s no time.”

The Conservative Party leader, who worked at The Spectator before leaving in 2016, also revealed some of her lunch preferences, expressing a distaste for sandwiches.

In her interview with the magazine’s new editor, Michael Gove, and Katy Balls, its political editor, she said: “Sometimes I will get a steak... I’m not a sandwich person.

“I don’t think sandwiches are a real food, it’s what you have for breakfast. I will not touch bread if it’s moist.”

Mrs Badenoch became the leader of the Tories in November, after a lengthy leadership contest in which she ultimately beat her nearest rival Robert Jenrick, now her shadow justice secretary.

She put the embrace of capitalism at the centre of her pitch, and said that it should no longer be considered a “dirty word”.

The former business secretary became embroiled in a row over whether or not maternity pay was set at the right level for businesses, after suggesting that it was “excessive”.

Mrs Badenoch is said to have quit her job at The Spectator in 2016 because she felt it would be “unfair” to keep the post open while she went on maternity leave to have her second child.

She also joked during the interview for the Christmas edition of the Spectator that anybody who puts decorations up before 1 December “should be fined”.

“That’s my ban!” she added.

The Tory leader went on to criticise Sir Keir Starmer for revealing that he might watch Love Actually over the festive period, as she believed that the film has “quite a lot of dark undertones”.

“There is a British prime minister who’s messing around and is not doing the foreign policy properly, people are cheating and there is a lot going on there if you move away from the smiley, happy, cheesy stuff,” she said, adding that she prefers watching Die Hard.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/kemi-badenoch-says-sandwiches-not-100933336.html

That's too much information Kemi.:laugh:

[Mystic Mock]

Because it's not really a true ideology. The centre basically always capitulates to the right, but they just don't want to admit they love the cruelty.

That's more of a faux centre person imo.

Anyone that's truly centre in Politics should be trying to aim for the best policies that the left and the right bring to the table.

Unfortunately like you've already said Slim, most of these Centre parties always end up picking a side.

[Oliver_W]

Taking "Bread and Circuses" quite literally.

[joeysteele]

She really would be better looking at how she is going to see off the Reform lot, instead of saying nonsense like this.

Lunch breaks are extremely important as are other breaks in the working day.
As for sandwiches, what possessed her say such tripe.
I make my own sandwiches plus as a vegetarian I like to be inventive with sandwiches too.
A sandwich can be better than a hurriedly bought or prepared other meal.
Plus more nourishing too.

She's quite a disappointment unfortunately.
Because all she seems to be doing is feed more to the Reform lot.
Unfortunately too, considering Starmer is really poor at PMQs, she's at times even worse.
I just shake my head in disbelief at what she raises.

Again we are left with 2 of the worst leaders possible.
In my view, there's not ONE good leader across ALL the Parties.
Even in BOTH the Green leaders.

Kemi Badenoch really needs to prioritise where her battles need to be massively better than she is doing now.

[Cherie]

Sniggering smiley

If I'd wanted it to be a gotcha, I could have used the search function.

The search function for what, are you saying I am lying? because I am not ...search away

[Cherie]

Because it's not really a true ideology. The centre basically always capitulates to the right, but they just don't want to admit they love the cruelty.

Don't be ridiculous

[Cherie]

That's more of a faux centre person imo.

Anyone that's truly centre in Politics should be trying to aim for the best policies that the left and the right bring to the table.

Unfortunately like you've already said Slim, most of these Centre parties always end up picking a side.

No party is truely bad or truely good they all have something to bring to the table, and some policies that should be roundly rejected

[bots]

the centre ground is where the majority of the planet reside in politics. It's laughable to criticise that position

[user104658]

the centre ground is where the majority of the planet reside in politics. It's laughable to criticise that position

Indeed. I can understand the point, Slim, that a lot of people on the right CLAIM the centre because they're not yet emboldened enough to declare that they are in fact on the right - but that's "internet stuff" / SoMed and forum rhetoric.

In the real world, the vast majority of people lie "around the centre" on the majority of issues and will shift left or right on specific issues usually depending on personal biases and experiences. Free-thinking people at least, not copy-paste-opinion Trumpists etc. or their equivalent to the left, which obviously does exist.

It depends on the people you encounter and the circles you move in. These days the vast majority of people I work with are just-left-of-centre and (believe me) it doesn't mean that there aren't strong opinions and convictions. They're just rational, reasoned, adult opinions with some element of practicality, rather than internet naval-gazing, idealism and point-scoring. Which I will concede - we're ALL guilty of. It's a guilty pleasure. It's not the real world, which can be easy to forget.

[UserSince2005]

I'm doing what Miss Kami asks, no lunch break for me today.

[Mystic Mock]

She really would be better looking at how she is going to see off the Reform lot, instead of saying nonsense like this.

Lunch breaks are extremely important as are other breaks in the working day.
As for sandwiches, what possessed her say such tripe.
I make my own sandwiches plus as a vegetarian I like to be inventive with sandwiches too.
A sandwich can be better than a hurriedly bought or prepared other meal.
Plus more nourishing too.

She's quite a disappointment unfortunately.
Because all she seems to be doing is feed more to the Reform lot.
Unfortunately too, considering Starmer is really poor at PMQs, she's at times even worse.
I just shake my head in disbelief at what she raises.

Again we are left with 2 of the worst leaders possible.
In my view, there's not ONE good leader across ALL the Parties.
Even in BOTH the Green leaders.

Kemi Badenoch really needs to prioritise where her battles need to be massively better than she is doing now.

I 100% agree with your points Joey.

[Mystic Mock]

No party is truely bad or truely good they all have something to bring to the table, and some policies that should be roundly rejected

I agree with you.

It's why I would like to see a party merge the best of what all of the major parties have to offer.

[Niamh.]

Indeed. I can understand the point, Slim, that a lot of people on the right CLAIM the centre because they're not yet emboldened enough to declare that they are in fact on the right - but that's "internet stuff" / SoMed and forum rhetoric.

In the real world, the vast majority of people lie "around the centre" on the majority of issues and will shift left or right on specific issues usually depending on personal biases and experiences. Free-thinking people at least, not copy-paste-opinion Trumpists etc. or their equivalent to the left, which obviously does exist.

It depends on the people you encounter and the circles you move in. These days the vast majority of people I work with are just-left-of-centre and (believe me) it doesn't mean that there aren't strong opinions and convictions. They're just rational, reasoned, adult opinions with some element of practicality, rather than internet naval-gazing, idealism and point-scoring. Which I will concede - we're ALL guilty of. It's a guilty pleasure. It's not the real world, which can be easy to forget.

Yep, agree with you and bots, I would consider myself centre but left leaning. I would never like to identify wholly and unquestionably with either side or ideology, each issue is different and I want to think about each one on it's own merits

[The Slim Reaper]

The search function for what, are you saying I am lying? because I am not ...search away

No, I'm saying if I'd actually wanted it to be a gotcha, I would have searched first and checked whether that was the case, but I didn't, I posed it as a question.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I agree with you.

It's why I would like to see a party merge the best of what all of the major parties have to offer.

wait, Labour have a best thing to offer??

[Alf]

Yep, agree with you and bots, I would consider myself centre but left leaning. I would never like to identify wholly and unquestionably with either side or ideology, each issue is different and I want to think about each one on it's own meritsQuantin bauble sees himself as intelligent because he got indoctrinated at university. But the reality is that he's thick as pig sh!t.

Where did his attendance at university get him, being a failed bookie, that's where.

Go ahead, delete this post. Whilst at the same time agreeing with his post, which obviously had an insulting dig at me as being a Trump supporter.

[Cherie]

No, I'm saying if I'd actually wanted it to be a gotcha, I would have searched first and checked whether that was the case, but I didn't, I posed it as a question.

aw right thanks for the clarification, I see no reason to lie on here, what would it achieve :laugh: I did to my eternal shame vote Lib Dib in the Nick Clegg era... :bawling:

[The Slim Reaper]

Indeed. I can understand the point, Slim, that a lot of people on the right CLAIM the centre because they're not yet emboldened enough to declare that they are in fact on the right - but that's "internet stuff" / SoMed and forum rhetoric.

In the real world, the vast majority of people lie "around the centre" on the majority of issues and will shift left or right on specific issues usually depending on personal biases and experiences. Free-thinking people at least, not copy-paste-opinion Trumpists etc. or their equivalent to the left, which obviously does exist.

It depends on the people you encounter and the circles you move in. These days the vast majority of people I work with are just-left-of-centre and (believe me) it doesn't mean that there aren't strong opinions and convictions. They're just rational, reasoned, adult opinions with some element of practicality, rather than internet naval-gazing, idealism and point-scoring. Which I will concede - we're ALL guilty of. It's a guilty pleasure. It's not the real world, which can be easy to forget.

What is centrism? What are the political aims and objectives of "the centre?"

Don't rock the boatism? We live in a world where right wing media rules the roost, so this is pretty much the exclusive doctrine we get shoved down our throats on a constant loop, so which boat are we fighting against rocking?

The left won the election recently in France. The centrist, Macron, put a stop to that. He wouldn't have prevented Le Pen taking office. Is Macron a based online nerd?

America has been working to unseat any leftist in South America for over 100 years. They also have caused most of the issues (along with the UK) in the middle east, by replacing any semi-progressive government.

Hitler was invited into power by social democrats.

Lets look at your political positions. When it comes to social issues, you hold views that are closer to the reactionary right - not talking about trans stuff, but I believe I've read you say that you would ban relationships between a 21 and 30yr olds, for example (obviously this was hypothetical as you don't have that power). I have no idea what your views are towards economic policy, because it's not really policy you've shown much interest in discussing, I believe (if I've missed your manifesto on economic redistribution, then I apologise, but I don't think I have). Economically hidden, socially conservative. Folks with those views up and down the country are being radicalised into reform by culture war issues, they are not joining the communist workers party. Because I somewhat know you, I wouldn't think you are a reform voter, but if you don't recognise what I've just laid out, as a real measurement of British Centrism, then I would implore you to think about it again.

Take Cherie - a former LD/Lab/Green voter, fully on board with tommy and Nigels riots

Take kate - supported Corbyns labour, but now a full Robinson acolyte.

Is this the centrism that the vast majority hold? Are Kate and Cherie victims of social media and being permanently online?

[The Slim Reaper]

the centre ground is where the majority of the planet reside in politics. It's laughable to criticise that position

You're a tory. Remember when you pretended you weren't, and then Girth posted a quote of you saying "I'm a tory?" Classic bots :laugh:

[bots]

i voted tory once in over 40 years when Thatcher was still around. See, this may be an alien concept to you, but peoples political views can change. For the record, i haven't voted in the last 3 general elections. My last vote was to remain in the EU

[The Slim Reaper]

i voted tory once in over 40 years when Thatcher was still around. See, this may be an alien concept to you, but peoples political views can change. For the record, i haven't voted in the last 3 general elections. My last vote was to remain in the EU

Pretending centrism is the way, and only admitting to voting tory when thatcher was on the ballot does not tally up. Was it Thatchers destruction of industry, or was it is the opening salvo of selling off our infrastructure to the highest bidder? Maybe it was the complete reduction in the taxation of corporations that appealed to your "centrism."

I know too well that peoples political opinions change, and I'm stating, quite clearly, that when push comes to shove, centrists generally align rightwards. Which, and I hate to have to point this out, you've just provided an example of.

[Cherie]

What is centrism? What are the political aims and objectives of "the centre?"

Don't rock the boatism? We live in a world where right wing media rules the roost, so this is pretty much the exclusive doctrine we get shoved down our throats on a constant loop, so which boat are we fighting against rocking?

The left won the election recently in France. The centrist, Macron, put a stop to that. He wouldn't have prevented Le Pen taking office. Is Macron a based online nerd?

America has been working to unseat any leftist in South America for over 100 years. They also have caused most of the issues (along with the UK) in the middle east, by replacing any semi-progressive government.

Hitler was invited into power by social democrats.

Lets look at your political positions. When it comes to social issues, you hold views that are closer to the reactionary right - not talking about trans stuff, but I believe I've read you say that you would ban relationships between a 21 and 30yr olds, for example (obviously this was hypothetical as you don't have that power). I have no idea what your views are towards economic policy, because it's not really policy you've shown much interest in discussing, I believe (if I've missed your manifesto on economic redistribution, then I apologise, but I don't think I have). Economically hidden, socially conservative. Folks with those views up and down the country are being radicalised into reform by culture war issues, they are not joining the communist workers party. Because I somewhat know you, I wouldn't think you are a reform voter, but if you don't recognise what I've just laid out, as a real measurement of British Centrism, then I would implore you to think about it again.

Take Cherie - a former LD/Lab/Green voter, fully on board with tommy and Nigels riots

Take kate - supported Corbyns labour, but now a full Robinson acolyte.

Is this the centrism, that the vast majority hold? Are Kate and Cherie victims of social media and being permanently online?

Erm I think you are conflating 'fully onboard' with an understanding as to why people are hacked off at the inaction of government whoever they are to address the pretty lengthy backlog of claims and get people either able to work or on their way ....I dont think I ever backed mindless hooliganism :think:

[The Slim Reaper]

Erm I think you are conflating 'fully onboard' with an understanding as to why people are hacked off at the inaction of government whoever they are to address the pretty lengthy backlog of claims and get people either able to work or on their way ....I dont think I ever backed mindless hooliganism :think:

A distinction without a difference in this case, in my opinion. When you parrot Robinson propaganda about "concerned citizens," then, although we're not friends, I don't believe you to be mindless enough to just repeat the same indoctrinated far right Mantra that was busy lighting up hotels and the fuzz.

[The Slim Reaper]

Greens the only progressive party on that list.

1867242834815836589

[bots]

Pretending centrism is the way, and only admitting to voting tory when thatcher was on the ballot does not tally up. Was it Thatchers destruction of industry, or was it is the opening salvo of selling off our infrastructure to the highest bidder? Maybe it was the complete reduction in the taxation of corporations that appealed to your "centrism."

I know too well that peoples political opinions change, and I'm stating, quite clearly, that when push comes to shove, centrists generally align rightwards. Which, and I hate to have to point this out, you've just provided an example of.

why can't you accept that people have an alternative viewpoint to your own. That is what this is really all about. You can't accept reality and try to shove some crackpot theory about politics down peoples throats. Newsflash, people vote for 1 million different reasons or don't vote at all. People are engaged with politics or not at all. Politics is life and cannot be boiled down to some narrow political ideology

[arista]

Kemi Badenoch has responded with a tweet on X

"The PM has time to respond to my jokes
about lunch.....but not time for the farmers
who produce our food.

He refused to answer questions because he doesn't care.
It's an ideological attack on farmers and will destroy lives.

The Conservatives will reverse his cruel Family Farm Tax."


It was debated in Part 2, of Gravitas WION HD
Sky Ch 519

[The Slim Reaper]

why can't you accept that people have an alternative viewpoint to your own. That is what this is really all about. You can't accept reality and try to shove some crackpot theory about politics down peoples throats. Newsflash, people vote for 1 million different reasons or don't vote at all. People are engaged with politics or not at all. Politics is life and cannot be boiled down to some narrow political ideology

And here we are in the famous Slim/Bots playbook.

You say something, I make a counter point. You make it about me. It's a tale as old as old as time. If you want to disagree with me, then disagree with me, but make it about comments that have been written, rather than having your jimmies rustled (shout out to LK wherever he is).

I've only commented on things you've written, you have to resort to this other weird stuff for some reason.

My politics is the minority in this country, so why wouldn't I be able to accept others have different viewpoints? Because you have nowhere else to go, after you boxed yourself into a cul-de-sac. As you seem to do every time we have a discussion. Don't blame me for that, you should be mad at yourself, brother.

[MTVN]

Greens the only progressive party on that list.

1867242834815836589

Starmer's reset speech the other day has had a good effect then :skull:

[The Slim Reaper]

Starmer's reset speech the other day has had a good effect then :skull:

:laugh:

This is another part of centrism I didn't even get to. Labour were voted in for change, and the fact they are a tepid party only interested in protecting the status quo (which of course, I pointed out years before an election was even called), will be the final driver of sending folks towards reform. When centrism gets power and does little to nothing with it, RW demagogues are the main beneficiaries, with the simple solutions (however wrong they may be) they offer, such as immigrants being the cause of all the nations ills. Especially during desperate times, which we are definitely in.

[Oliver_W]

What is centrism? What are the political aims and objectives of "the centre?"

This kind of buys into the idea that everyone is tribalistic, and wants to fit neatly into a defined box.

Some people just have a string of connected or disparate ideals to which they cling, and these don't always perfectly coalesce with an existing ideology.

I reject all labels - I like to say this is because I'm above your puny earthlings' politics :laugh: but it's really because I barely have a coherent set of beliefs :joker:

My only consistencies which have carried through my various phases are environmentalism (and at one point I was even against that for like a week, but I can't remember what my "reasoning" was) and dislike of big companies. The latter ties in to the next one, which is I'm against the exploitation of the Little Guy. All of this in isolation might make someone think I'm a Leftie.

But the above are all why I'm against mass uncapped immigration - I don't trust any government to respect the Green Belt when it comes to excreting crappy new builds, while the brownfields will remain untouched, and maybe unused. And high numbers of non-specific workers coming in doesn't exactly help Darren Down The Road.

I'm also in favour of women and girls keeping their sex-segregated spaces and sports.

And those two points might make me look "right wing."

But to quote Treebeard - I'm not altogether on anyone's side, because no-one is altogether on my side. And I'm certainly no friend of those tree-killing Orcs and their masters :joker:


But meh, feel free to refute any of that, I barely give politics more than a surface level thought, I'd be relatively easy to swing :laugh:

[arista]

https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/lc-images-sky/lcimg-dfefc893-45d4-449e-9913-686eac63dd66.png

[Mystic Mock]

wait, Labour have a best thing to offer??

Every party has it's good points imo.

[Mystic Mock]

Greens the only progressive party on that list.

1867242834815836589

Reform's ahead of the Tories?:shocked:

[Cherie]

Reform's ahead of the Tories?:shocked:

Keep up Mock, thet Tories have tanked :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Keep up Mock, thet Tories have tanked :laugh:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/GettyImages-2169859374.jpg?w=730

[joeysteele]

Reform's ahead of the Tories?:shocked:

:joker: as is the case near all the time Mock.
Polls are not reliable.

Selectively taking one only to make some point is never a wise move.

There's 2 other polls out around the same time as that one.

One has Labour and Conservatives each on 26% with Reform on 19%

Another has Labour on 27%, the Conservatives on 25% and Reform on 22%

They're easy to see by just entering as a search 'latest UK opinion polls'.
So the whole picture of the opinion polling world is seen, not a tiny snapshot of only one.

The polls reflect certainly the dismay and disillusionment in politics.
They tell us little of where all will be in July/August 2029.

Remember Farage proclaiming in an election debate that Reform had now gone ahead of the Conservatives in the polls.
Yet on election day, Reform were 10% behind the Conservatives.
The Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 14%

Reliance on opinion polls is not a recommendation I'd make, and certainly NEVER on only one single poll.

[bots]

Nobody thought the tories would be wiped out at the next election when Boris won in a landslide :laugh:

[The Slim Reaper]

:joker: as is the case near all the time Mock.
Polls are not reliable.

Selectively taking one only to make some point is never a wise move.

There's 2 other polls out around the same time as that one.

One has Labour and Conservatives each on 26% with Reform on 19%

Another has Labour on 27%, the Conservatives on 25% and Reform on 22%

They're easy to see by just entering as a search 'latest UK opinion polls'.
So the whole picture of the opinion polling world is seen, not a tiny snapshot of only one.

The polls reflect certainly the dismay and disillusionment in politics.
They tell us little of where all will be in July/August 2029.

Remember Farage proclaiming in an election debate that Reform had now gone ahead of the Conservatives in the polls.
Yet on election day, Reform were 10% behind the Conservatives.
The Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 14%

Reliance on opinion polls is not a recommendation I'd make, and certainly NEVER on only one single poll.

It wasn't a selectively chosen poll. The numbers are almost irrelevant for the point I wanted to make. Moving a few points around is neither here nor there, because we have the Starmer/Reeves lab party in power - the archetypal centrist party. Very concerned with being seen as grown ups making tough choices, and yet those tough choices are exactly the same ones as the tories made (with the support of the centrist LD party, no less).

Labour have co-opted the language of reform, when it comes to immigration, and have generally been the centre right party I pointed out to you numerous times, and you failed to accept was the reality. I've quoted you numerous times asking you to comment on what lab are doing and have done...crickets. That's fine, you don't owe me a response, but now you want to talk about my post and where you feel it fails, I feel like you've opened up the channel again, so let's talk about it.

When push comes to shove, centrists will fight against the policies that actually made this country great - The post war socialism that built the NHS, workers rights, the welfare state, high taxation leading to free education. None of this is even discussed in classrooms or on news programs.

Instead, we get reform, who have 5 mp's, and yet they're on all the beebs politics shows on a constant loop. When do Independent alliance or green mp's get open invites? That's on the supposedly lefty BBC, no less. The centre of this country is pushing right wing politics down our throats, and most people think this makes them centrists.

[user104658]

What is centrism? What are the political aims and objectives of "the centre?"

Don't rock the boatism? We live in a world where right wing media rules the roost, so this is pretty much the exclusive doctrine we get shoved down our throats on a constant loop, so which boat are we fighting against rocking?

The left won the election recently in France. The centrist, Macron, put a stop to that. He wouldn't have prevented Le Pen taking office. Is Macron a based online nerd?

America has been working to unseat any leftist in South America for over 100 years. They also have caused most of the issues (along with the UK) in the middle east, by replacing any semi-progressive government.

Hitler was invited into power by social democrats.

Lets look at your political positions. When it comes to social issues, you hold views that are closer to the reactionary right - not talking about trans stuff, but I believe I've read you say that you would ban relationships between a 21 and 30yr olds, for example (obviously this was hypothetical as you don't have that power). I have no idea what your views are towards economic policy, because it's not really policy you've shown much interest in discussing, I believe (if I've missed your manifesto on economic redistribution, then I apologise, but I don't think I have). Economically hidden, socially conservative. Folks with those views up and down the country are being radicalised into reform by culture war issues, they are not joining the communist workers party. Because I somewhat know you, I wouldn't think you are a reform voter, but if you don't recognise what I've just laid out, as a real measurement of British Centrism, then I would implore you to think about it again.

Take Cherie - a former LD/Lab/Green voter, fully on board with tommy and Nigels riots

Take kate - supported Corbyns labour, but now a full Robinson acolyte.

Is this the centrism that the vast majority hold? Are Kate and Cherie victims of social media and being permanently online?

Part of the issue Slim is that I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what centrism actually entails; it's not balancing on a left/right seesaw hoping to find a centrist equilibrium on every political stance, this is the misunderstanding that leads to people who don't tribally align themselves to either the left or right as "fence sitting". I come under fire for taking strong positions on pretty much any subject you can name on this forum. Not for fence sitting. If anything, for being "overly confident of a strong opinion". I get that same accusation from people on the clear left and right. Not accusations of over-neutrality; I'm branded a MSM brainwashed wokey by the Reform crew and a right-leaning conservative by what remains of the forum's social left. Frequently on the same day. Occasionally on the same thread. It's a real rollercoaster sometimes :joker:.

For the bit in bold you're incorrect I have never said that I would legally "ban" relationships between adults of any age; what I have said is that I find relationships with large age gaps, where one person is young (probably under 25, definitely under 21) to be highly suspect, personally morally questionable, and if a friend my age started banging a 21 year old I'd not be particularly interested in continuing to call them a friend. I don't want it banned, I wouldn't introduce any aspect of legislation or legality into that at all. But therein lies the problem, maybe? That you automatically assume that a moral personal stance MUST be related to a corresponding legal or political stance? That isn't the real world as I experience it, for most sensible adults, it's the realm of ... well, internet BS ... a warped reality that really reflects nothing particularly real, and yet increasingly spills over into the real world, because you have idiots that have no comprehension of what they're reading protesting and rioting for reasons they don't actually understand. Because they were told it was the way to go, by those they politically align themselves with, and who they trust do know what they're talking about.

As for economic stance that one is fairly simple; I don't talk about it on here because there's no point talking about it on here. The sort of "right and left" being referred to on most of the internet, and 100% on this forum, has absolutely jack to do with economics :joker:. We're talking about populations who need a calculator to figure out 20% VAT. Who believe that the answer to everyone having more money is everyone getting better jobs. Waste of time. It's not a conversation worth even entertaining.

[Swan]

Probably a stupid analogy but lets say you're a neutral (centralist) watching 2 football teams you're not really arsed about, as both mean very little to you. Some years you can get behind the certain "set up", the certain "manager" (Party leader), the "players" (current MP's) and you'll lean for the team you favour that year, out of the 2. And if a certain team that year could help "your team" (what you believe in, on any subject) then you'll lean towards them, support them, want them to win. Therefore be more likely to vote for them. It's honestly that simple, silly analogy aside.

I dunno, i know what im trying to say, probably sounds silly reading in text. But the fact of the matter is, Centralist's help swing elections, we're as important as any hardcore leftie or rightie, in fact we're probably more important when it comes to the vote. It's crucial for both parties to appeal to the centralist's if they want to win.

The biggest problem with the left is they see centralist's as right leaning and more likely to vote for the "opposition". In fairness, that probably proven true in the past 10 years or so. The left have become so authoritarian, that what was once very much centre-left is now considered firm (not far, firm) right wing.

But you also must see, and understand, how WE as centralist's see the right wing upper class' arrogance. A centralist usually wants to vote left honestly, you just make things so difficult for us with all this "YOU MUST SEE IT OUR WAY AND THAT'S THAT" kinda attitude. Let us debate certain issues, let a centrailist question these things, without calling him/her a "racist/phobe/bigot" etc.

Anyway, fck this, that's enough politics for me on a Saturday night. But bare this in mind...... When you have Boris Johnson, PM at the time, go on national TV and tell people (in the midst of a cost of living crisis) to "buy a new kettle as it could save you £10 a YEAR in energy" you, as a centralist are NOT on his Tory side, at ALL. Man was taking the piss. People like BJ wouldn't know what actual hardship, and financial struggles were if they got their massive shclongs out and slapped him across the face with them!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Aaand the thread descends into a look how big my progressive down wiv the kids dick looks

Pathetic

:umm2:

[user104658]

Aaand the thread descends into a look how big my progressive down wiv the kids dick looks

Pathetic

:umm2:

"Help help they're using big words again, big words are woke!" :joker:

[user104658]

Aaaand why are you starting every post with "aaaand" recently LT? It's daaaft. What a spoooon.

[Cherie]

Rife with the usual mysogny as well, using Kate and I as examples of why something something is terrible, good job I have a sense of my own worth, the likes of Slim would like to crush me under his mansplaining ...tough

[Mystic Mock]

Keep up Mock, thet Tories have tanked :laugh:

I didn't think by that much.:laugh:

[Mystic Mock]

:joker: as is the case near all the time Mock.
Polls are not reliable.

Selectively taking one only to make some point is never a wise move.

There's 2 other polls out around the same time as that one.

One has Labour and Conservatives each on 26% with Reform on 19%

Another has Labour on 27%, the Conservatives on 25% and Reform on 22%

They're easy to see by just entering as a search 'latest UK opinion polls'.
So the whole picture of the opinion polling world is seen, not a tiny snapshot of only one.

The polls reflect certainly the dismay and disillusionment in politics.
They tell us little of where all will be in July/August 2029.

Remember Farage proclaiming in an election debate that Reform had now gone ahead of the Conservatives in the polls.
Yet on election day, Reform were 10% behind the Conservatives.
The Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 14%

Reliance on opinion polls is not a recommendation I'd make, and certainly NEVER on only one single poll.

Oh, I agree that surveys/opinion polls aren't everything.

But I am fascinated that the Reform hype hasn't died down by now, like I thought it would've.

[user104658]

Rife with the usual mysogny as well, using Kate and I as examples of why something something is terrible, good job I have a sense of my own worth, the likes of Slim would like to crush me under his mansplaining ...tough

Have to agree on that one Cherie, although I doubt it's intentional, holding women "to a higher moral standard" than what's expected of male peers is a very common form of unconscious misogyny.

[The Slim Reaper]

Part of the issue Slim is that I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what centrism actually entails; it's not balancing on a left/right seesaw hoping to find a centrist equilibrium on every political stance, this is the misunderstanding that leads to people who don't tribally align themselves to either the left or right as "fence sitting". I come under fire for taking strong positions on pretty much any subject you can name on this forum. Not for fence sitting. If anything, for being "overly confident of a strong opinion". I get that same accusation from people on the clear left and right. Not accusations of over-neutrality; I'm branded a MSM brainwashed wokey by the Reform crew and a right-leaning conservative by what remains of the forum's social left. Frequently on the same day. Occasionally on the same thread. It's a real rollercoaster sometimes :joker:.

For the bit in bold you're incorrect I have never said that I would legally "ban" relationships between adults of any age; what I have said is that I find relationships with large age gaps, where one person is young (probably under 25, definitely under 21) to be highly suspect, personally morally questionable, and if a friend my age started banging a 21 year old I'd not be particularly interested in continuing to call them a friend. I don't want it banned, I wouldn't introduce any aspect of legislation or legality into that at all. But therein lies the problem, maybe? That you automatically assume that a moral personal stance MUST be related to a corresponding legal or political stance? That isn't the real world as I experience it, for most sensible adults, it's the realm of ... well, internet BS ... a warped reality that really reflects nothing particularly real, and yet increasingly spills over into the real world, because you have idiots that have no comprehension of what they're reading protesting and rioting for reasons they don't actually understand. Because they were told it was the way to go, by those they politically align themselves with, and who they trust do know what they're talking about.

As for economic stance that one is fairly simple; I don't talk about it on here because there's no point talking about it on here. The sort of "right and left" being referred to on most of the internet, and 100% on this forum, has absolutely jack to do with economics :joker:. We're talking about populations who need a calculator to figure out 20% VAT. Who believe that the answer to everyone having more money is everyone getting better jobs. Waste of time. It's not a conversation worth even entertaining.

That's a fair reply, but we have some differences, obviously

Firstly, any accusation thrown at you regarding holding strong or confident opinions, is also thrown at me, and I have many more differences with the TIBB echo chamber than you do.

I don't have a misunderstanding of what centrism is imo, but we can agree to disagree. I would turn that around and say that in the context you're using it, it's this mysterious unknowable, that can be all things to all men (and women - before I get called a misogynist again :laugh: ), and allows people to float anywhere they want without ever having to reckon with any consequences. I'm not sure you'd argue against it being primarily a status quoist position, which has for the last 50 years been right wing neoliberalism.
I also don't think there is an economic conversation to be had with professor Trumpet, regarding Marx, and yet most people would know where my economic ideology lies.


As for 21-30, I apologise for misremembering and misrepresenting your views, but I still think you are way over on the social conservatism side of things - which is completely fine, and I have no hate towards you taking a moral stance, as my whole economic ideology is also based on personal morality.

I also wasn't using the example of you in the negative, but if we break down the 2 areas of politics most commonly used for simplicity of use - social and economic, then pointing out that when push comes to shove, socially conservative, economically hidden voters, will generally (not 100%) move rightwards, I don't think that's a controversial statement, especially with what history teaches us, and what is happening right now in British politics.

[The Slim Reaper]

Rife with the usual mysogny as well, using Kate and I as examples of why something something is terrible, good job I have a sense of my own worth, the likes of Slim would like to crush me under his mansplaining ...tough

Point out 2 liberal dudes on the forum that quickly jumped on board with the riots or have changed politically so quickly.

[The Slim Reaper]

Have to agree on that one Cherie, although I doubt it's intentional, holding women "to a higher moral standard" than what's expected of male peers is a very common form of unconscious misogyny.

Come on dude, this is a fcuking stretch. I would expect you to know better than this.

A pickme post.

In fact, the only person I can think of that changed politically so quickly is joey, and ask him whether he feels held to a lower standard by me.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The "I'm such a big fan of me" vibe in this thread is actually off the scale"

Usual two suspects

:joker:

[The Slim Reaper]

A real, solitary dude begging for attention vibe.

Not even a suspect, police already have the repeat offender in custody

:blush:

[Cherie]

Point out 2 liberal dudes on the forum that quickly jumped on board with the riots or have changed politically so quickly.

That is neither here or there.....you don't need to single out members of the forum to make a point, the fact that you do though shows me who you are....to a tee, also I haven't changed political view at all, I have been politically homeless for the last two elections and remain so.....but you know me better than I know myself obviously

Never see you hold Arista or Alf to account, great banter there for sure.

Apologies Arista and Alf you are entitled to your opinions and I respect them but the obvious kowtowing by Slim to you both is quiet hilarious while singling out me and Kate :laugh:

[Cherie]

Come on dude, this is a fcuking stretch. I would expect you to know better than this.

A pickme post.

In fact, the only person I can think of that changed politically so quickly is joey, and ask him whether he feels held to a lower standard by me.

You are like a dog with a bone with Joey, why don't you just realise he doesn't want to engage with you instead of baiting him?

You come onto this forum to put mainly women down, you show yourself as bitter and not interested in people's viewpoints or even try to understand a viewpoint, its all you you you....you know best for everyone, its tiresome, you dont have kids, you dont have responsibility....you just look after yourself and your cat...once you come into the real world ...maybe you will understand people come from different view points, essentially unless you are far left or far right...views are worth a consideration

[Cherie]

sorry I should have added 'dude'....who the hell says that these days and

'brother' (never sister....hmmmm) ...

[The Slim Reaper]

You are like a dog with a bone with Joey, why don't you just realise he doesn't want to engage with you instead of baiting him?

You come onto this forum to put mainly women down, you show yourself as bitter and not interested in people's viewpoints or even try to understand a viewpoint, its all you you you....you know best for everyone, its tiresome, you dont have kids, you dont have responsibility....you just look after yourself and your cat...once you come into the real world ...maybe you will understand people come from different view points, essentially unless you are far left or far right...views are worth a consideration

And here we are again. I only ever respond to what people write, and yet weirdos get to line up and just write all kinds of sh1t about me continually.

We used to be friends - until you started fcuking speaking to me in a really angry and aggressive way, completely out of nowhere. 2 of the current mods even asked what was up with you, and I made excuses for you for a long, long time. Until i didn't make excuses for you anymore. I won't name the mods, but you probably already talk to them on a regular basis, so ask them. You were a fcuking snide, and so I talk to you like you're a fcuking snide.

Joey talked about my post, so I replied to Joeys post. No dog with a bone, no trying to pycho-analyse him - you could learn from that.

Just because I disagree with other peoples posts, it doesn't mean sh1t. If you don't like reading what i write, then you have the ignore function. I give reasoned replies that I back up with data and facts. In order to reply to someone, it sort of helps to have read what they have written, and If I've read what they've written, then by definition, I'm interested in what they say. just because I don't subscribe to your echo chamber, you don't get to tell me what to post and who to reply to, you absolute fciuking snidey weirdo.

[Cherie]

And here we are again. I only ever respond to what people write, and yet weirdos get to line up and just write all kinds of sh1t about me continually.

We used to be friends - until you started fcuking speaking to me in a really angry and aggressive way, completely out of nowhere. 2 of the current mods even asked what was up with you, and I made excuses for you for a long, long time. Until i didn't make excuses for you anymore. I won't name the mods, but you probably already talk to them on a regular basis, so ask them. You were a fcuking snide, and so I talk to you like you're a fcuking snide.

Joey talked about my post, so I replied to Joeys post. No dog with a bone, no trying to pycho-analyse him - you could learn from that.

Just because I disagree with other peoples posts, it doesn't mean sh1t. If you don't like reading what i write, then you have the ignore function. I give reasoned replies that I back up with data and facts. In order to reply to someone, it sort of helps to have read what they have written, and If I've read what they've written, then by definition, I'm interested in what they say. just because I don't subscribe to your echo chamber, you don't get to tell me what to post and who to reply to, you absolute fciuking snidey weirdo.

wow you are an angry little man aren't you? ....I don't take you that seriously to even get angry with you..... not sure angry and aggressive are my mode of posting but hey ho if that is what you thought you are entitled to your opinion as are the two current mods, not going to worry about it....:hee::wavey:

[user104658]

Come on dude, this is a fcuking stretch. I would expect you to know better than this.

A pickme post.

In fact, the only person I can think of that changed politically so quickly is joey, and ask him whether he feels held to a lower standard by me.

I actually didn't even think of it causing gross offense is the honest answer here - I've had my own subconscious bias so regularly challenged on the issues of subtle societal misogyny so frequently that it's become not a thing. It's not a moral high ground stance I'm still regularly challenged on it often enough lol. Women are held to a higher moral standard by both sides of the political spectrum; almost considered class traitors for not being progressive enough. It's an issue but it wasn't meant to be that deep. We're fellas raised in a patriarchal society, to claim that we don't hold some deep rooted unintentional misogynistic reactions is limiting, is all. I will take on board that I've at some point forgotten that "that might be misogyny" is for most people confronting.

FWIW it's not so much that I had an issue with the observation of a political switch, more that you for some reason chose to lump Kate and Cherie into one sentence on the topic, when (in my view, anyway) I think the only thing that they really have in common on here, is that they're female members. I found them an odd pairing to use as an example. It certainly feels like an "...even the female members" statement, when the bar for male members on here is in the actual sewers, and while holding the bar higher for female members might feel like it's a positive assessment/acknowledgement of how low the standards are of the blokes, it actually never plays that way in practice. It just adds the pressure of an additional expectation.

[user104658]

The "I'm such a big fan of me" vibe in this thread is actually off the scale"

Usual two suspects

:joker:

I'm enjoying your "Father Jack" era Trumpet, where you just sit in the corner farting and making crap jibes :joker:. Drink! Feck! Woke MSM! Keep it up sir.

[Cherie]

give reasoned replies that I back up with data and facts.

just wanted to pick up on this SLIM......you quoted me in your data and facts and you know nada about me, my situation, my background, where I am in life...unless you are stalking me ? ...so be careful about what you claim are facts

[Cherie]

I actually didn't even think of it causing gross offense is the honest answer here - I've had my own subconscious bias so regularly challenged on the issues of subtle societal misogyny so frequently that it's become not a thing. It's not a moral high ground stance I'm still regularly challenged on it often enough lol. Women are held to a higher moral standard by both sides of the political spectrum; almost considered class traitors for not being progressive enough. It's an issue but it wasn't meant to be that deep. We're fellas raised in a patriarchal society, to claim that we don't hold some deep rooted unintentional misogynistic reactions is limiting, is all. I will take on board that I've at some point forgotten that "that might be misogyny" is for most people confronting.

FWIW it's not so much that I had an issue with the observation of a political switch, more that you for some reason chose to lump Kate and Cherie into one sentence on the topic, when (in my view, anyway) I think the only thing that they really have in common on here, is that they're female members. I found them an odd pairing to use as an example. It certainly feels like an "...even the female members" statement, when the bar for male members on here is in the actual sewers, and while holding the bar higher for female members might feel like it's a positive assessment/acknowledgement of how low the standards are of the blokes, it actually never plays that way in practice. It just adds the pressure of an additional expectation.

Thank you.... I know we don't always agree, but you do at times get right to the nub of it

I am particularly surprised at him using Kate, as she considers him a friend... and apparently he is her friend...jeez

[The Slim Reaper]

That is neither here or there.....you don't need to single out members of the forum to make a point, the fact that you do though shows me who you are....to a tee, also I haven't changed political view at all, I have been politically homeless for the last two elections and remain so.....but you know me better than I know myself obviously

Never see you hold Arista or Alf to account, great banter there for sure.

Apologies Arista and Alf you are entitled to your opinions and I respect them but the obvious kowtowing by Slim to you both is quiet hilarious while singling out me and Kate :laugh:

How were you singled out, exactly?

Because you were mentioned? I spoke about stuff you'd both written on the forum. I don't think/hope Kate would take offence, and I didn't write anything about her that was derogatory. i knew you'd take offence, but you'd contributed to both this thread and the thread I referenced. They were your words, not mine.

in a thread where I called out Bots (for what he'd written) and Joey (for what he'd written) you think me mentioning 2 women on the same 2 pages is misogyny?

Ask Alf and Arista if I've ever called them out. Ask LT, ask Parm, ask Mock, ask Oliver, ask SB, ask MTVN, ask James, ask any of the dudes that have posted regularly over the last few years. I've called them out on many occasions, sometimes I've been right, sometimes I've been wrong (and apologised), and do you know what? They've also called me out straight back. That's fine. it's a fcuking forum. I said this forum would turn into little more than MSN messenger a few years ago, and it seems like you're angry because it isn't quite there yet.

All you need to do is keep your head down and I'll disappear again in no time, but I might stick around a bit longer than I intended now, so congrats for winning my heart.

[Cherie]

How were you singled out, exactly?

Because you were mentioned? I spoke about stuff you'd both written on the forum. I don't think/hope Kate would take offence, and I didn't write anything about her that was derogatory. i knew you'd take offence, but you'd contributed to both this thread and the thread I referenced. They were your words, not mine.

in a thread where I called out Bots (for what he'd written) and Joey (for what he'd written) you think me mentioning 2 women on the same 2 pages is misogyny?

Ask Alf and Arista if I've ever called them out. Ask LT, ask Parm, ask Mock, ask Oliver, ask SB, ask MTVN, ask James, ask any of the dudes that have posted regularly over the last few years. I've called them out on many occasions, sometimes I've been right, sometimes I've been wrong (and apologised), and do you know what? They've also called me out straight back. That's fine. it's a fcuking forum. I said this forum would turn into little more than MSN messenger a few years ago, and it seems like you're angry because it isn't quite there yet.

All you need to do is keep your head down and I'll disappear again in no time, but I might stick around a bit longer than I intended now, so congrats for winning my heart.

in order

wow you really want my attention don't you....

yes you have but only in response to things they have written and in a thread, not random **** you made up to suit your own narrative

I won't be keeping my head down,but you keep trying to stop me posting in response to your absolute crap.....and see how it goes

[The Slim Reaper]

I actually didn't even think of it causing gross offense is the honest answer here - I've had my own subconscious bias so regularly challenged on the issues of subtle societal misogyny so frequently that it's become not a thing. It's not a moral high ground stance I'm still regularly challenged on it often enough lol. Women are held to a higher moral standard by both sides of the political spectrum; almost considered class traitors for not being progressive enough. It's an issue but it wasn't meant to be that deep. We're fellas raised in a patriarchal society, to claim that we don't hold some deep rooted unintentional misogynistic reactions is limiting, is all. I will take on board that I've at some point forgotten that "that might be misogyny" is for most people confronting.

FWIW it's not so much that I had an issue with the observation of a political switch, more that you for some reason chose to lump Kate and Cherie into one sentence on the topic, when (in my view, anyway) I think the only thing that they really have in common on here, is that they're female members. I found them an odd pairing to use as an example. It certainly feels like an "...even the female members" statement, when the bar for male members on here is in the actual sewers, and while holding the bar higher for female members might feel like it's a positive assessment/acknowledgement of how low the standards are of the blokes, it actually never plays that way in practice. It just adds the pressure of an additional expectation.

I discussed bots and Joey in thread, I didn't look for 2 different women. There are not that many people on here to begin with. if you can think of 2 alternatives to make the same point I made, and think of them in 2 mins whilst you're writing a post, i'll hold my hand up.

[Swan]

I knew you'd ignore, yet take digs at my centrists post Slim. We aint against you, but not everything is black and white. Im proud to know my own mind.

[Cherie]

anyhow I am out for now,going to watch a movie with the old man....night all

[Swan]

anyhow I am out for now,going to watch a movie with the old man....night all

Is it Santa? Night Cherie

[Cherie]

Is it Santa? Night Cherie

he does have white stubble :laugh: good luck to Chelsea tomorrow :love:

I'm going to watch Norwich v Burnley with my youngest as he has ticketss who is also the Chelsea fan....so double bubble hopefully

Night Swan

[The Slim Reaper]

in order

wow you really want my attention don't you....
yes you have but only in response to things they have written and in a thread, not random **** you made up to suit your own narrative


I won't be keeping my head down,but you keep trying to stop me posting in response to your absolute crap.....and see how it goes

You're the one writing love letters to me, sister

We've only had the chat for a few hours, and it's a Friday night - not really surprising. Need to give folks the chance to get sorted. Chill, sister Kate.

Don't you think you're being a bit OTT? How could I even start stopping you post in response to my absolute crap?

yes you have but only in response to things they have written and in a thread, not random **** you made up to suit your own narrative


I mean, if even you're admitting it, then I'm not sure it's possible for me to add anything to it. That's what I've been saying all along. I write replies to what is written, people get carte blanche on this forum to just make any old sh1t up about me personally. It's really weird, because i know for a fact that if I did it, it wouldn't be tolerated at all.

[The Slim Reaper]

I knew you'd ignore, yet take digs at my centrists post Slim. We aint against you, but not everything is black and white. Im proud to know my own mind.

I haven't taken any digs at you, my friend. I didn't reply to your post, because I replied to sb, followed relatively quickly by Cherie writing me loveletters. I did plan to write a reply but it would have prob been tomorrow. Seems a bit moot now.

I don't need validation. I just pop on occasionally write a few posts, then disappear. it's not me who loses my sh1t because the nasty man is here to disagree with me.

[Swan]

I haven't taken any digs at you, my friend. I didn't reply to your post, because I replied to sb, followed relatively quickly by Cherie writing me loveletters. I did plan to write a reply but it would have prob been tomorrow. Seems a bit moot now.

I don't need validation. I just pop on occasionally write a few posts, then disappear. it's not me who loses my sh1t because the nasty man is here to disagree with me.

I get drunk, make myself look silly, and leave for a few days, usually head held in shame....

But, i don't hate your hate on us centralists, i just think you have your team, and don't understand "drifters"?

You know i have a lot of respect for you. Honestly, if there was NO ONE in the middle, this country would be ****ed!

[The Slim Reaper]

I get drunk, make myself look silly, and leave for a few days, usually head held in shame....

But, i don't hate your hate on us centralists, i just think you have your team, and don't understand "drifters"?

You know i have a lot of respect for you. Honestly, if there was NO ONE in the middle, this country would be ****ed!

I disagree with you but as you're a dude, it's not an issue, my brother :smug:

Seriously. I've written enough on centrism already. there is loads more I could write, but I think the forum might explode if I do.

What put us on to a path was post war socialism. That's just a fact. Now, if socialism had been in charge of the country for 50 years, then human nature and corruption would have taken over, and it would have failed. However, right wing neoliberalism has been in charge for 50 years, and it has failed. No one thinks this country is in a healthy state at the moment, and yet right wing neoliberalism can't survive on the right alone, it needed the centre, whether that's Blairs (a thatcher acolyte) version of neoliberalism (more centrist, and better, actually - but not good enough), or Camerons/Johnsons, right through to truss' libertarian version.

None of this would have been possible without the centre ground.

Now after 50 years of this, absolutely no change is on offer, only more of the exact same thing, only this time with a different colour rosette. For this to keep happening, then centrists need to have been on board and whether that's knowingly or unwittingly the results are the same.

Centrist labour members were awarded peerages by Johnsons tory party for working against labour with false smears. When centrists have the choice of left or right, they invariably, and provably go right. Now that's ok if that's what people believe, but to pretend that isn't actually the case is not a position based in reality.

[Cherie]

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper View Post
We've only had the chat for a few hours, and it's a Friday night - not really surprising. Need to give folks the chance to get sorted. Chill, sister Kate.

:umm2:What even is that, you are making my skin crawl, aside from that you bring up two mods who said something to you in private years ago about my attitude to you,not too hard to figure out who they are, nice of you to throw people who probably consider you as a friend under the bus just to point score though, I am putting you on permanent ignore now, you will be all on your own on there, I just cannot be dealing with your gaslighting creepy bullshit for another minute on here, so chat away to yourself, bring me up as many times as you want as per your obsession with me, but I wont be reading it .

[Kate!]

Hi.

This is difficult as I claim both Cherie and Slim as friends and like them both.

I have little to say except that I didn't take offence at Slim saying I was a Robinson supporter, and I've told him so. I looked up acolyte as I wasn't sure of the meaning and it means follower.

I'd like to add that I don't support riots by following Tommy and if you take time to find out truly what he's all about he is a peaceful man, as is Paul Thorpe one of his associates. People probably won't agree, that's fine.

I'm sad Cherie feels aggrieved and I can see both sides of the disagreement. I'll stay neutral.

Peace to you both and I hope maybe one day your differences will resolve. If not then please know I enjoy and appreciate you both on a personal level.

Thank you for listening.

Kate xx

[Cherie]

Hi.

This is difficult as I claim both Cherie and Slim as friends and like them both.

I have little to say except that I didn't take offence at Slim saying I was a Robinson supporter, and I've told him so. I looked up acolyte as I wasn't sure of the meaning and it means follower.

I'd like to add that I don't support riots by following Tommy and if you take time to find out truly what he's all about he is a peaceful man, as is Paul Thorpe one of his associates. People probably won't agree, that's fine.

I'm sad Cherie feels aggrieved and I can see both sides of the disagreement. I'll stay neutral.

Peace to you both and I hope maybe one day your differences will resolve. If not then please know I enjoy and appreciate you both on a personal level.

Thank you for listening.

Kate xx

No bother Kate thanks for posting

[The Slim Reaper]

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper View Post
We've only had the chat for a few hours, and it's a Friday night - not really surprising. Need to give folks the chance to get sorted. Chill, sister Kate.

:umm2:What even is that, you are making my skin crawl, aside from that you bring up two mods who said something to you in private years ago about my attitude to you,not too hard to figure out who they are, nice of you to throw people who probably consider you as a friend under the bus just to point score though, I am putting you on permanent ignore now, you will be all on your own on there, I just cannot be dealing with your gaslighting creepy bullshit for another minute on here, so chat away to yourself, bring me up as many times as you want as per your obsession with me, but I wont be reading it .

I agree; that post makes my skin crawl too, but when you say I don't say sister, but I'm quoted using sister, then what are we doing here?

No one has been thrown under the bus, because there is nothing for anyone to be under a bus for. You already know you're also on good terms with everyone, so it's obvious you weren't being slagged off or gossiped about. Asking what was up was a legitimate question at the time; that's how jarring and (for the time) out of character it was. Or are we pretending that mods don't talk to anyone or have any curiosity about what's going on a forum they moderate.

Took a while but we made it in the end. None of this ever had to happen. We were on good terms, and that's where this started, none of this is because of any misogyny. I haven't been the nicest person in this thread, but I haven't resorted to anything like the torrent of attempted personal attacks you've thrown my way.