hypochondriac

Where?

I can see the sense in getting a new kit this year as last year was hopefully a one off.

First or second ban? You will be missed.

I have always liked you trousers.

Been just over a week and already the forum has shown a marked improvement. Well done Baj, will have to go for that pint soon.

I don't vote for a singular party. I look at the relative merits of a party at election time and take into account things like their performance since the last election. I find it odd that someone proclaims themselves as n affiliate of a certain party.

Nope he is signing tomorrow. Confirmed by Jordan Cross. Little disappointed TBH.

They are signing Norris tomorrow

Good post. This especially is very true. It's a totally pointless 'march.'

No one is stupid enough to think that or to take that as an inference from what anyone was saying.

Well yes probably because (and I don't know any figures) women who wear almost nothing put themselves at higher risk of sexual assault. That is not the same as believing they deserved it because they were dressed that way though.

My father came back recently from working with From Kenya With Love. He just shook his head and said 'we just don't have poverty in this country.'

I have the away one.

I don't think they are asking to be raped, but they are probably more likely to get taken advantage of in a nightclub (touched on the a*se etc). Wearing virtually nothing sends out a message that the are 'easy' or more sexually promiscuous than women who choose not to dress like that. Whether it is intended like that is a matter for debate.

Yes. I am 'angry' on an internet forum. Grow up.

Do you really think that the type of men who rape women are going to be in the smallest bit bothered about a bunch of lesbians parading around in thongs? It will make no difference at all and is just an excuse to get angry about something.

A lot of people think that people who dress sluttily deserve to be raped? And this walk is going to change their mind?

I was being serious.

Yep. The first one has a hint of Pete Burns about her.

Australia and the USA minded.

It's ridiculous sensationalist reporting which causes moral panic. Less than two percent of the work force is male which means that children miss out on so much. No wonder babies and toddlers cry and are fearful when men walk into a room. The Plymouth case involved a woman sexually abusing a child but does that means it's ok to be suspicious of women? I understand there is a need for men to be more careful, I always leave the door open when escorting a child to the toilet or changing a nappy for instance but to have people questioning why a man would want to work in a nursery is deeply ignorant and offensive.

Of course but that isn't what she said. There was a debate about men in childcare on radio two a couple of days ago. Many comments were good (we have a responsibility to get men in childcare, men are needed just as much as women etc) but Also some staggeringly ignorant comments about why would men want to work with children and that there will always be suspicion there and you have to ask the motives of a man who wants to work with children. Rubbish like this just fuels these idiots.

As a male in childcare, I find the men flirting with their daughters line extremely offensive.

You changed pretty quick from your mask of civility to abuse. I knew your game all along.

Maybe I'll mess with people's heads and put the little sh*ts avatar on mine.