BBC Look East - is Julie Reinger pregnant?
Michael Kilpatrick
Alena and I would like to know if anybody else had noticed the change in
the choice and style of outfits that Look East weather presenter wears,
from around November onwards? Gone are the days when she *always* wore
the same black trousres.
We have now come to the conclusion that this change in her appearance is
owing to pregnancy, but to our knowledge there has been no announcement
on BBC Look East. There is some debate here as to whether it shows yet,
or not.
Either we've got the wrong end of the stick entirely (in which case we
apologise to Julie), or "you heard it here first".
What do you reckon?
Michael
The Natural Philosopher
> To all those who watch BBC Look East fairly regularly:
>
> Alena and I would like to know if anybody else had noticed the change in
> the choice and style of outfits that Look East weather presenter wears,
> from around November onwards? Gone are the days when she *always* wore
> the same black trousres.
>
> We have now come to the conclusion that this change in her appearance is
> owing to pregnancy, but to our knowledge there has been no announcement
> on BBC Look East. There is some debate here as to whether it shows yet,
> or not.
ALL wetaher giorls get pregnant. I suspect teh met office ships them out
as soon as tey are married, in order that they can get teh superb
maternity benefits from teh beeb.
>
> Either we've got the wrong end of the stick entirely (in which case we
> apologise to Julie), or "you heard it here first".
>
> What do you reckon?
>
Julie's all right , but not for the whole weekend.
> Michael
Tim Ward
news:pICdnVcKUNN14_XW...@pipex.net...
>
> What do you reckon?
Why should you care? Why should we care? What business is it of anybody's?
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
The Natural Philosopher
> "Michael Kilpatrick" <mic...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:pICdnVcKUNN14_XW...@pipex.net...
>> What do you reckon?
>
> Why should you care? Why should we care? What business is it of anybody's?
>
Michael Kilpatrick
> "Michael Kilpatrick" <mic...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:pICdnVcKUNN14_XW...@pipex.net...
>
>>What do you reckon?
>
>
> Why should you care? Why should we care? What business is it of anybody's?
>
Oh, "lighten up", as they say. It's not "business", it's just an
observation from the telly - I'm not staring into her windows with a
pair of binoculars. As TNP hinted at, you may have observed that a lot
of female weather presenters seem to have babies - more so, at least
seemingly, than any other type of female television presenter. It does
seem rather frequent.
Anyway on a more serious note, you should be aware that walking around
pregnant at work and not announcing it until really late, until you
*really* have to, is potentially dangerous. Indeed, someone I know
caught shingles and, because she really needed to pop into work to check
something, first took care to ask around colleagues at work - one of
whom, much to everyone's surprise, had to say she was pregnant.
Michael
Tim Ward
>
> As TNP hinted at, you may have observed that a lot of female weather
> presenters seem to have babies
Nope. You can't see what shape they are on the radio, and I wouldn't notice
them disappearing for a few months, and it's not as if anyone announces
they're on maternity leave.
> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female television
> presenter.
Oh, telly. I don't do that.
> Anyway on a more serious note, you should be aware that walking around
> pregnant at work and not announcing it until really late, until you
> *really* have to, is potentially dangerous. Indeed, someone I know caught
> shingles and, because she really needed to pop into work to check
> something, first took care to ask around colleagues at work - one of
> whom, much to everyone's surprise, had to say she was pregnant.
Yes people are well advised to be careful, particularly when infected with
something that can hurt a baby before the mother knows she's pregnant.
When I got German measles at college I just went home - there was no earthly
chance of being sure that I was avoiding pregnant people.
Jules
>> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female television
>> presenter.
>
> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
Do they have Look East on the radio? Wouldn't it be Listen East?
Michael Kilpatrick
> "Michael Kilpatrick" <mic...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:xsWdnTGJIaTtIPXW...@pipex.net...
>
>>As TNP hinted at, you may have observed that a lot of female weather
>>presenters seem to have babies
>
>
> Nope. You can't see what shape they are on the radio,
Ha ha! Indeed.
> and I wouldn't notice
> them disappearing for a few months, and it's not as if anyone announces
> they're on maternity leave.
Really? You mean you don't recognise the voices of all the people you
hear on the radio - even the weather presenters? I'm sure I did (I used
to listen to Radio 4 regularly).
>
>
>>more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female television
>>presenter.
>
>
> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
Fair enough.
[snip sensible comments about infectious diseases and pregnancy]
Michael
Paul Oldham
> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:12:31 +0000, Tim Ward wrote:
>>> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female television
>>> presenter.
>> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
>
> Do they have Look East on the radio?
No, radio is generally more fine grained, so we have BBC Radio
Cambridgeshire rather than eastern region programming. I say "generally"
because in the evening it does goes regional in various ways.
In the morning it's even more fine grained where the north and southern
halves of the county have separate breakfast shows on 95.7MHz and 96MHz
respectively (the latter is also on 1026KHz) and they do something
similar on Saturday afternoon so that Peterborough United supporters can
listen to their team losing while Cambridge City/Uniting and Histon
supporters can do the same in the south.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"I am what I am, I do what I want"
Michael Kilpatrick
> Jules wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:12:31 +0000, Tim Ward wrote:
>>
>>>> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female
>>>> television presenter.
>>>
>>> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
>>
>>
>> Do they have Look East on the radio?
>
>
> No, radio is generally more fine grained, so we have BBC Radio
> Cambridgeshire rather than eastern region programming. I say "generally"
> because in the evening it does goes regional in various ways.
Maybe it does, but *whenever* I tune into a "BBC local radio station"
when I'm in the car, all I *ever* is the same old pop music as on any
other radio station, and that isn't "regional content". Maybe once every
couple of hours there's 5 minutes of actual local news and content?
Maybe more? If there is, I just happen never to hear it. Perhaps I'm
just jinxed always to miss the real regional content?
Either way, I'm not going to sit through some awful pop music waiting to
find out if the speech content between tracks is of any value as I
simply don't want to hear that sort of music. On that basis I've always
considered BBC local radio to be completely and utterly pointless.
Michael
Tim Ward
>
> Maybe it does, but *whenever* I tune into a "BBC local radio station" when
> I'm in the car, all I *ever* is the same old pop music as on any other
> radio station, and that isn't "regional content". Maybe once every couple
> of hours there's 5 minutes of actual local news and content?
I expect so. They do actually employ journos to go round interviewing people
like me, so they must broadcast *some* of the material they collect! (I've
never actually heard myself on the radio, though, as I haven't a clue where
to tune in to the local stations.)
The Natural Philosopher
> "Michael Kilpatrick" <mic...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:xsWdnTGJIaTtIPXW...@pipex.net...
>> As TNP hinted at, you may have observed that a lot of female weather
>> presenters seem to have babies
>
> Nope. You can't see what shape they are on the radio, and I wouldn't notice
> them disappearing for a few months, and it's not as if anyone announces
> they're on maternity leave.
>
>> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female television
>> presenter.
>
> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
>
>> Anyway on a more serious note, you should be aware that walking around
>> pregnant at work and not announcing it until really late, until you
>> *really* have to, is potentially dangerous. Indeed, someone I know caught
>> shingles and, because she really needed to pop into work to check
>> something, first took care to ask around colleagues at work - one of
>> whom, much to everyone's surprise, had to say she was pregnant.
>
> Yes people are well advised to be careful, particularly when infected with
> something that can hurt a baby before the mother knows she's pregnant.
>
> When I got German measles at college I just went home - there was no earthly
> chance of being sure that I was avoiding pregnant people.
>
And before the vaccine came in.
The Natural Philosopher
use the traffic button. Then you JUST get the local traffic reports.
Actually, when I was flooded in a few years back, BBC local radio was
the ONLY way to find out what the *** was happening.
> Michael
Paul Oldham
> Paul Oldham wrote:
>
>> Jules wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:12:31 +0000, Tim Ward wrote:
>>>
>>>>> more so, at least seemingly, than any other type of female
>>>>> television presenter.
>>>> Oh, telly. I don't do that.
>>>
>>> Do they have Look East on the radio?
>>
>> No, radio is generally more fine grained, so we have BBC Radio
>> Cambridgeshire rather than eastern region programming. I say "generally"
>> because in the evening it does goes regional in various ways.
>
> Maybe it does, but *whenever* I tune into a "BBC local radio station"
> when I'm in the car, all I *ever* is the same old pop music as on any
> other radio station, and that isn't "regional content". Maybe once every
> couple of hours there's 5 minutes of actual local news and content?
> Maybe more? If there is, I just happen never to hear it. Perhaps I'm
> just jinxed always to miss the real regional content?
That's very true of the afternoon day time stuff but 7-9am on BBC RC
it's speech only, all local news. Then from 9am to 12:30pm it's
alternating speech (mainly consumer affairs but also other local topical
stuff) and music with a split of about 50:50. Thereafter it's much as
you describe with a little more speech on the evening drive show.
> Either way, I'm not going to sit through some awful pop music waiting to
> find out if the speech content between tracks is of any value as I
> simply don't want to hear that sort of music. On that basis I've always
> considered BBC local radio to be completely and utterly pointless.
The morning material isn't bad if you want local content.
The other show I like, because I like the music content, is Paul Barnes'
show which goes out across the eastern region on Saturday nights (11pm
to 1am) which used to be called "Gold for Grown Ups" but I see is now
labelled "The Late Paul Barnes" and is (I quote) "Late night big band,
jazz and irresistible sounds"[1]. I've not listened to it for a while
but a quick listen just now suggests he's still playing the same stuff
which you won't find in many other places.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p002mhdx - with "Listen now" option
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"I presume you've tried curry, nipple stimulation, making love, long walks?"
Paul Oldham
> Actually, when I was flooded in a few years back, BBC local radio was
> the ONLY way to find out what the *** was happening.
Yup, for those sort of events they are the only people to listen to.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"
Fevric J. Glandules
> some awful pop music
You are now officially An Old Man. Congratulations!
Your pipe and slippers await collection at the checkout desk.
At this stage you may opt for Grumpy Old Bastard status, if
you wish, but this is optional (although Eccentric Uncle
is highly recommended if you don't want GOB).
Paul Oldham
> Michael Kilpatrick wrote:
>
>> some awful pop music
>
> You are now officially An Old Man. Congratulations!
>
> Your pipe and slippers await collection at the checkout desk.
Actually IME BBC local radio *is* pop music for old men. Anything later
then eighties would be very modern.
Now if he didn't like Kiss that would be another matter, that is young
persons' music (and very good it is too if you happen to like that sort
of thing, which I do despite being the wrong demographic completely).
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"Ooops. My brain just hit a bad sector"
Michael Kilpatrick
> Michael Kilpatrick wrote:
>
>>
>> Maybe it does, but *whenever* I tune into a "BBC local radio station"
>> when I'm in the car, all I *ever* is the same old pop music as on any
>> other radio station, and that isn't "regional content". Maybe once
>> every couple of hours there's 5 minutes of actual local news and
>> content? Maybe more? If there is, I just happen never to hear it.
>> Perhaps I'm just jinxed always to miss the real regional content?
>>
>> Either way, I'm not going to sit through some awful pop music waiting
>> to find out if the speech content between tracks is of any value as I
>> simply don't want to hear that sort of music. On that basis I've
>> always considered BBC local radio to be completely and utterly pointless.
>>
>
> use the traffic button. Then you JUST get the local traffic reports.
Blimey, no thank you! If there's anything worse than sitting through
music you really hate in order to wait for local news or information,
it's having the car stereo interrupt *my* favourite CD music and
suddenly jump to some danmed traffic announcement on the radio which,
more likely than not, will be about something 35 miles away in Wisbech,
or on the M1, or somewhere else I have no intention of going to that day...
Michael
Paul Bird
> Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
>
>> Michael Kilpatrick wrote:
>>
>>> some awful pop music
>>
>> You are now officially An Old Man. Congratulations!
>>
>> Your pipe and slippers await collection at the checkout desk.
>
> Actually IME BBC local radio *is* pop music for old men. Anything later
> then eighties would be very modern.
>
> Now if he didn't like Kiss that would be another matter, that is young
> persons' music (and very good it is too if you happen to like that sort
> of thing, which I do despite being the wrong demographic completely).
>
Kiss FM = sewing machine on speed.
PB
The Luggage
> Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
> > Michael Kilpatrick wrote:
>
> >> some awful pop music
>
> > You are now officially An Old Man. Congratulations!
>
> > Your pipe and slippers await collection at the checkout desk.
>
> Actually IME BBC local radio *is* pop music for old men. Anything later
> then eighties would be very modern.
>
> Now if he didn't like Kiss that would be another matter, that is young
> persons' music (and very good it is too if you happen to like that sort
> of thing, which I do despite being the wrong demographic completely).
>
Over here in Oxfordshire, we have JackFM, which has a decently wide
range of music. Mostly 80's & 90's, but they don't seem to have a play
list, so you get all sort of wierd & wonderful stuff that you've never
heard before.
As a bonus, they have Avon^H Paul Darrow doing an interesing line in
sarcastic tag lines between the songs. "Jack FM. Playing the music
_we_ want. If you don't like it - tough!" , "Jack FM. Some people have
said we're impolite. . . _And_???"
Tends to be my second choice if there's nothing interesting on Radio
4.
TL
Tim Ward
news:hkd16k$a98$2...@news.albasani.net...
>>
>> When I got German measles at college I just went home - there was no
>> earthly chance of being sure that I was avoiding pregnant people.
>>
> golly. Musta been after the colleges went co-ed.
>
> And before the vaccine came in.
1974 iirc. Churchill, one of the first bunch to go co-ed.
Mark Ayliffe
Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> illuminated us with:
> "The Natural Philosopher" <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:hkd16k$a98$2...@news.albasani.net...
>>>
>>> When I got German measles at college I just went home - there was no
>>> earthly chance of being sure that I was avoiding pregnant people.
>>>
>> golly. Musta been after the colleges went co-ed.
>>
>> And before the vaccine came in.
>
> 1974 iirc. Churchill, one of the first bunch to go co-ed.
Except it was called co-res. Most Cambridge departments and faculties
were of course co-ed long before that. But even in an "all male"
college, the presence of women was not unknown...
--
Mark
Real email address | Why don't they make the whole plane out of the material
is mark at | used for the indestructible black box ?
ayliffe dot org |
Roland Perry
Feb 2010, Mark Ayliffe <mark.see.sig.f...@ayliffe.invalid>
remarked:
>> 1974 iirc. Churchill, one of the first bunch to go co-ed.
>
>Except it was called co-res. Most Cambridge departments and faculties
>were of course co-ed long before that. But even in an "all male"
>college, the presence of women was not unknown...
Of course, there were women on the staff, and various kinds of female
visitor. However, when I was at college *any* overnight guests (male or
female) were only allowed with advance permission from your Tutor. And
as a student you needed permission to be out of college overnight. Hence
all the stories about people climbing in and out of colleges at 2am (and
the need to hide from bedders and porters who were keeping an eye out
for strangers wandering around college at implausibly early hours like
7am).
--
Roland Perry
Tim Ward
news:t37rkvLo...@perry.co.uk...
>
> Of course, there were women on the staff, and various kinds of female
> visitor. However, when I was at college *any* overnight guests (male or
> female) were only allowed with advance permission from your Tutor. And as
> a student you needed permission to be out of college overnight. Hence all
> the stories about people climbing in and out of colleges at 2am (and the
> need to hide from bedders and porters who were keeping an eye out for
> strangers wandering around college at implausibly early hours like 7am).
My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an instruction to
bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to the
front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
Paul Oldham
> Kiss FM = sewing machine on speed.
Yup. Love it. Also Club Asia 963KHz but it's pretty marginal signal
strength up here.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.milton.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"When a clock is hungry, it goes back four seconds"
Paul Bird
> Paul Bird wrote:
>
>> Kiss FM = sewing machine on speed.
>
> Yup. Love it. Also Club Asia 963KHz but it's pretty marginal signal
> strength up here.
U R the oldest swinger in town AICMFP
Jon Green
> My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an instruction to
> bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
> bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to the
> front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
> porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as adults.
Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.
Tim Ward
news:RtCdnUZcmK-5-PDW...@brightview.co.uk...
> On 06/02/2010 10:06, Tim Ward wrote:
>
>> My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an instruction to
>> bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
>> bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to the
>> front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
>> porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
>
> I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as adults.
'Cos they weren't, mostly. It took some time for the rule changes to catch
up with the age of majority dropping from 21 to 18.
Roland Perry
2010, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:
>> Of course, there were women on the staff, and various kinds of female
>> visitor. However, when I was at college *any* overnight guests (male or
>> female) were only allowed with advance permission from your Tutor. And as
>> a student you needed permission to be out of college overnight. Hence all
>> the stories about people climbing in and out of colleges at 2am (and the
>> need to hide from bedders and porters who were keeping an eye out for
>> strangers wandering around college at implausibly early hours like 7am).
>
>My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an instruction to
>bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
>bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to the
>front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
>porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
Your college had "different routes" at approximately ground level. The
traditional colleges in the city centre, didn't.
--
Roland Perry
Duncan Wood
wrote:
Some of them didn't, you can get into most colleges at approximately
ground level.
Roland Perry
12:48:14 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>> My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an instruction to
>> bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
>> bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to the
>> front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
>> porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
>
>I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as adults.
Because at the time adults were 21 years +
Plus the fact that with only eight-week terms, they thought that
students should be concentrating on their studies, rather than
distractions such as randomly accessible genitalia.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Duncan Wood <nntp...@dmx512.co.uk> remarked:
>>traditional colleges in the city centre, didn't.
>
>Some of them didn't, you can get into most colleges at approximately
>ground level.
I don't count scaling a ten foot wall as being "ground level".
--
Roland Perry
Duncan Wood
wrote:
> In message <op.u7pkyzl5haghkf@lucy>, at 13:55:37 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010,
Neither do I, 7'6" is hardly a a major obstacle when you're twenty though.
Offhand I can't think of a way into Corpus.
Jon Green
> In message <RtCdnUZcmK-5-PDW...@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 12:48:14 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>>> My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an
>>> instruction to
>>> bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
>>> bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to
>>> the
>>> front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
>>> porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
>>
>> I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as
>> adults.
>
> Because at the time adults were 21 years +
The age of consent for heterosexual activities has been 16 since 1885,
13 since 1875, and prior to that it was 12 for females, and undefined
for males. So in terms of sexual relations (which is what we're talking
about here, let's face it), it's taken the colleges over a century to
join the real world.
> Plus the fact that with only eight-week terms, they thought that
> students should be concentrating on their studies, rather than
> distractions such as randomly accessible genitalia.
Well, that's tragically unrealistic as well as insultingly patronising
of them.
Roland Perry
21:56:59 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>>> I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as
>>> adults.
>>
>> Because at the time adults were 21 years +
>
>The age of consent for heterosexual activities has been 16 since 1885,
>13 since 1875, and prior to that it was 12 for females, and undefined
>for males. So in terms of sexual relations (which is what we're
>talking about here, let's face it), it's taken the colleges over a
>century to join the real world.
Just because it's legal, doesn't make it morally right.
>> Plus the fact that with only eight-week terms, they thought that
>> students should be concentrating on their studies, rather than
>> distractions such as randomly accessible genitalia.
>
>Well, that's tragically unrealistic as well as insultingly patronising
>of them.
No-one was forcing people to study there.
--
Roland Perry
Jon Green
> In message <RfWdnbCxOoBYePDW...@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 21:56:59 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>
>> 13 since 1875, and prior to that it was 12 for females, and undefined
>> for males. So in terms of sexual relations (which is what we're
>> talking about here, let's face it), it's taken the colleges over a
>> century to join the real world.
>
> Just because it's legal, doesn't make it morally right.
*choke* That's a personal decision, not one for a bunch of impotent
elderly dons in overstuffed armchairs to make, nor porters to enforce,
nor bedders to inform. It's a set of anachronistic and irrelevant rules
that reflect(ed) a century-old veneer of morality.
>>> Plus the fact that with only eight-week terms, they thought that
>>> students should be concentrating on their studies, rather than
>>> distractions such as randomly accessible genitalia.
>>
>> Well, that's tragically unrealistic as well as insultingly patronising
>> of them.
>
> No-one was forcing people to study there.
Yeah, they could have taken their four 'A's to a redbrick, because it
would have been easier to get a sex life.
On another planet, perhaps.
Tim Ward
>
> *choke* That's a personal decision, not one for a bunch of impotent
> elderly dons in overstuffed armchairs to make
Have you ever *met* any dons?
rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
> > No-one was forcing people to study there.
>
> Yeah, they could have taken their four 'A's to a redbrick, because
> it would have been easier to get a sex life.
They didn't need 4 A's in those days.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
23:13:46 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>On another planet, perhaps.
Apparently you are.
--
Roland Perry
Paul Rudin
> Just because it's legal, doesn't make it morally right.
If there was common consent about was morally right we wouldn't need
many of our laws... we could just outlaw what we all agreed to be
immoral.
The Natural Philosopher
Rupert Moss-Eccardt
> On 06/02/2010 13:51, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <RtCdnUZcmK-5-PDW...@brightview.co.uk>, at
>> 12:48:14 on Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>>>> My college (rumour had it at the time) had to put round an
>>>> instruction to
>>>> bedders that they were to fail to notice the wrong people in the wrong
>>>> bedrooms in the morning pending the change to the statutes getting to
>>>> the
>>>> front of the Privy Council's queue. And of course you could avoid the
>>>> porters just by using a different route into or out of college.
>>>
>>> I never quite understood why the colleges couldn't treat adults as
>>> adults.
>>
>> Because at the time adults were 21 years +
>
> The age of consent for heterosexual activities has been 16 since 1885,
> 13 since 1875, and prior to that it was 12 for females, and undefined
> for males. So in terms of sexual relations (which is what we're talking
> about here, let's face it), it's taken the colleges over a century to
> join the real world.
Different laws, actually. There has been a lag about the requirements
for parental permssion and, at the same time, there was the belief that
the college was in loco parentis for those yet to achieve their
majority. There has also been the complication of students from other
jurisdictions so, for many years, colleges and universities played safe.
Roland Perry
Paul Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> remarked:
>> Just because it's legal, doesn't make it morally right.
>
>If there was common consent about was morally right we wouldn't need
>many of our laws... we could just outlaw what we all agreed to be
>immoral.
We also have "standards" that people expect our institutions to up hold.
I don't see sixth formers being encouraged to bonk during school hours,
for example. Even if they are above the legal age.
--
Roland Perry
tony sayer
scribeth thus
I thought that climbing was an entry qualification to Cam.. well in the
old days;)...
--
Tony Sayer
Jon Green
> "Jon Green"<jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:Rsudnd-3A4VUavDW...@brightview.co.uk...
>>
>> *choke* That's a personal decision, not one for a bunch of impotent
>> elderly dons in overstuffed armchairs to make
>
> Have you ever *met* any dons?
AIUI, when the rules were originally set, academia was essentially a
gerontarchy. What the dons are like these days is a different matter.
Jon Green
Ah yes, the Bart Simpson, "You are, but what am I?" /argumentum ad
speculum/. Most mature. I'm impressed.
Jon Green
Hmmm, how many ways is this a straw man argument? Let's see:
1. No-one's /encouraging/ /anyone/ to bonk, just wanting them to be
treated like people old enough to make their own choices;
2. Unless "school hours" are midnight-2am, that's irrelevant to this
discussion;
3. We're talking about activities within the privacy of the person's own
personal accommodation, not in the middle of the lecture theatre;
4. There is this small thing called Article 8.1 of the European
Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. I know it was
enacted and codified into British law within the last hundred years, but
it does still apply nonetheless.
Rupert Moss-Eccardt
> On 07/02/2010 09:35, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <87ock1v...@rudin.co.uk>, at 07:29:34 on Sun, 7 Feb 2010,
>> Paul Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Just because it's legal, doesn't make it morally right.
>>>
>>> If there was common consent about was morally right we wouldn't need
>>> many of our laws... we could just outlaw what we all agreed to be
>>> immoral.
>>
>> We also have "standards" that people expect our institutions to up hold.
>> I don't see sixth formers being encouraged to bonk during school hours,
>> for example. Even if they are above the legal age.
>
> Hmmm, how many ways is this a straw man argument? Let's see:
>
> 1. No-one's /encouraging/ /anyone/ to bonk, just wanting them to be
> treated like people old enough to make their own choices;
> 2. Unless "school hours" are midnight-2am, that's irrelevant to this
> discussion;
> 3. We're talking about activities within the privacy of the person's own
> personal accommodation, not in the middle of the lecture theatre;
However at the time that this chaperoning took place, the general belief
was that the institution was acting In Loco Parentis.
> 4. There is this small thing called Article 8.1 of the European
> Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. I know it was
> enacted and codified into British law within the last hundred years, but
> it does still apply nonetheless.
There is the right to a private life but it doesn't give a right to
override the desires of parents where the 'child' is still in the
guardianship.
Lyn
> > Paul Rudin <paul.nos...@rudin.co.uk> remarked:
LOL! Is this the same Jon Green who recently visited Girton Towers and
got on SO well with
the youngest female in my house?
:-)
Lyn
PS She likes you a lot!
PPS Bring her a bone next time you visit...
Roland Perry
15:05:14 on Sun, 7 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>>> On another planet, perhaps.
>>
>> Apparently you are.
>
>Ah yes, the Bart Simpson, "You are, but what am I?" /argumentum ad
>speculum/. Most mature. I'm impressed.
I'm not follower of Bart, so don't quite understand your comment.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
15:15:11 on Sun, 7 Feb 2010, Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> remarked:
>On 07/02/2010 09:35, Roland Perry wrote:
>2. Unless "school hours" are midnight-2am, that's irrelevant to this
>discussion;
The comparison would be with a boarding school, if you were expecting it
to be an analogy; but in fact it was an example (something rather
different) of a situation where people expect a certain amount of
"standards" to be adhered to.
--
Roland Perry
The Natural Philosopher
Passed me by as well.