Electronic Scribblings

Vox Hunt: Fishy

Show us some fish.

24_10_2002 14_13_0001

I ~think~ these fish were in the pond at the Alamo when we visited. Pretty sure it was that trip.

24-Oct-2002 seems to be the date stamp. 14:13 timestamp?

Yup. The Alamo pond.

Its not a very good picture, and rather odd to be photographing Koi at the Alamo but hey ho :)

What is living comfortably mean to you?

Times Article: We used to have it all... Sebastian Cresswell-Turner says he and his professional friends are the nouveau poor – a frighteningly downwardly mobile class

When I was a boy, almost everyone we knew lived in a large house in the country or in the better parts of London. I am not claiming for a moment that we were especially grand – just perfectly well-off. But back then Battersea and Clapham were entirely off our radar, Stockwell another country, and Brixton, Peckham and Streatham simply unheard of. Now, with a few exceptions among those who are notably rich or successful, the next generation of the same families I grew up with is living in just these areas.

Then take private education. The number of people in my parents’ circle who sent their children to state schools could be counted on the fingers of one hand, and were regarded as unfortunate, odd or even subversive. A generation later, however, a considerable proportion of my friends have opted for state schools for their children, in almost all cases for financial reasons.

If this is not downward mobility on a broad scale, then what is?

It goes on, and has had an interesting reaction in the comments. Especially over such gems as:

So how much does a married couple with three children need to live the sort of life that reasonably well-off professionals of my parents’ generation took for granted? The property alone – a house in the country and perhaps a flat in London – will cost a minimum of £3m. Then the school fees will be £75,000 a year plus extras; after which food, clothes, cars, the odd holiday and all the rest will add another £50,000 at the very least. Even if you own the bricks and mortar outright, as everyone in my parents’ generation did, that implies a pretax income of at least £200,000. Throw in a mortgage and a margin for error, and you’d better be on . . . what, a third of a million a year? And this, mind you, to live comfortably, no more.

£75K per year ~ To live comfortably, no more....

What world do they live in again?

Not so sheepish afterall.....

A few days ago I posted about Thousands of rich Japanese women were conned into believing lambs were valuable miniature poodles.

Well, amusingly enough (as pointed out on LJ by a friend) this story is fake!

www.Snopes.com: Sheepish Discovery

Thanks AH!

Top Gear ~ Next seasons race...../

Spoilers for the next Top Gear!

This is actually the MySpace blog of a cameraman on their latest trek.

Savile garden

The Charybdis. Giles Rayner 2005

The Charybdis.

This is found within Temperate house at Saville Gardens, Part of the Royal Landscape (aka Virginia Waters lake, Vally Gardens and Saville Gardens). I loved the whirlpool in the centre.

I have uploaded a lot more photos to Zoomer in a set for Saville Gardens.

Bra Appeal: Unwanted bras?

This charity specifically wants decent bras sent to them to distribute.

http://www.breasttalk.co.uk/bra-appeal

BBC News story.... Polygamous lesbians flee Sharia

Polygamous lesbians flee Sharia

A Nigerian lesbian who "married" four women last weekend in Kano State has gone into hiding from the Islamic police, with her partners.  Under Sharia law, adopted in the state seven years ago, homosexuality and same-sex marriages are outlawed and considered very serious offences.  All five women, who are believed to be film actresses in the local home-video industry, were born Muslims, otherwise they would not be covered by Sharia law. A Kano police spokesman told the BBC that his officers were not actively looking for the women, but would arrest them if need be.

Interesting collision of different ways of looking at things.

I intellectually get why Nigeria is conservative, but shudder at the legal implications of the laws.

Confronting homophobia is a tough task. Doing so while also battling poly-phobia.  Gotta have guts. And a very interesting example of Polyamoury, being poly isn't just about 1 man + >1 woman.....

How annoying...

Every time I tried to post my comment (see previous entry 'Vox ate my comment') It came up with an error related to 'can't connect to server' - so I tried again. This also happened when I tried on my own Vox, twice.

End result - 3 posts on my own vox (at least I have now deleted 2) and 3 on the group :P Can't delete them.

Vox ate my comment

I tried to comment on Social Justice: Co-Voxers make National Hate Statement.....Try to shoot down Matthew Shepherd Law but my comment got munched. I now need to actually work so am posting my comment for there here.

Interesting argument. You CAN avoid acting on your personal desires - but does this mean you don't have them or you are able to supress or ignore them?

A Celibate priest or Nun s no less heterosexual because s/he no longer has sex at all.

A Prisioner in a single-sex jail who has sex with a fellow inmate isn't necessarily going to 'stay' gay outside jail - wants sex more than s/he cares about the gender of the person supplying it.

Many gay men & women try to supress their desire, getting married etc, and some can keep this up. Others can't.

So yes, Many people can supress their desires to fit in with their society - some we REQUIRE to (Paedophiles etc) ~ but not all, and not all want to.

You Gay? You want to fit in with your 'no-gays' society? Fine. Your choice.

But saying that all homosexuals should isn't right. We might as well turn around and say to all women that they ~have~ to fit in with the patriarchal idea of women's place in the home etc etc. Or turn to black people and say 'act like you are black, accept that [group x] thinks you are second class and be greatful that we let you breath our air'

Intelectually I see their point. It reminds me (tangentally) of a different argument:

Why should one group have special benefits that another group doesn't simply due to a life-style choice that an individual makes?

Parents have time off, sebaticals, special parking spaces, special considerations for holiday times etc etc for something they CHOOSE to do - breed. We don't (generally) hate someone for wanting to be parents and understand & consider natural the very deep need that drives people to have children. But some don't. Some think it is rather horrid, and don't see why people go overboard - IVF, adoption, etc etc - to get children, to have children and all the palava around children.

I have a collegue who admits ze* deliberatly parks in parents only spaces - how dare they presume to have something based on their own selfish choices? Why should they be given special treatment for this? Ze* is, of course, Child-free, and would LOVE to be able to take 6m-1year off for 'personal reasons' on part pay etc. But can't - Zey* are not allowed - its not a good enough reason to want something: but breed & you get this "special treatement".

Sigh. Any group that is perceived to get something - some form of protection, consideration or benefit - that another doesn't is open to accusations of discrimination / reverse discrimination or whatever.

Ciggie breaks when a non-smoker can't have the same number of breaks? Short hours for working moms that a non-mom can't get? you will find someone who thinks it is unfair. And maybe sometimes it is.

But no one dies over those.

My personal view? Zero tolerance for intolerance.

Yet they have the right to their views, as we have the right to fight it.

*Ze, zie, zey etc are one of the gender neutral alternatives to he/she

He does the 'Monster Mash' no more....

bobby 'boris' pickett & the cryptkickers - monster mash

`Monster Mash' singer Pickett dies at 69

Bobby "Boris" Pickett, whose dead-on Boris Karloff impression propelled the Halloween anthem to the top of the charts in 1962, making him one of pop music's most enduring one-hit wonders, has died of leukemia. He was 69.
"Monster Mash" hit the Billboard chart three times: when it debuted in 1962, reaching No. 1 the week before Halloween; again in August 1970, and for a third time in May 1973. The resurrections were appropriate for a song where Pickett gravely intoned the forever-stuck-in-your-head chorus: "He did the monster mash. ... It was a graveyard smash."

Absolutely timeless!