Lighthouse

Had a mare with a delivery driver last year. Went something like this: Ordered an item online for £35, free postage, UK seller. Sent tracking number in confirmation email, checked after a few days and it’s coming from China - okay, no biggie. Get email about a week later saying my parcel will be delivered today - I’m in, perfect. Receive text the same day saying we were unable to deliver your item due to problem with the address. Look out of front window - Nothing. Walk to end of drive - nothing resembling a delivery vehicle for 1/4 mile either way. Receive email saying they will attempt to redeliver on day X. Day X comes, receive text saying they were unable to deliver as item was oversized and needed a specialist vehicle (item would fit in a shoe box). Get fed up and decide to just let them return to sender and claim a refund. Check tracking website a few weeks later, item has apparently been ‘destroyed’ at the depot. Email original website and relay all of the above, ask for refund, they refuse on the grounds that I was ‘negligent’ with my address. Email them about 6 more times with screenshots of my address, written perfectly on the original order email. They refuse point blank to acknowledge any of this, end up getting a refund through Visa.

You literally just complained about all the culture war bullsh*t on the election thread. Do you want it here or not?

That's interesting because now you've removed the idea of sexuality from gender, so you're arguing that a man who dates a transgender woman is quite simply a gay man dating another man. I'm perfectly happy with that argument but an awful lot of trans people I would wager are not. You talked about a lack of validation in your previous post but you freely acknowledge that a transgender person is a) Nothing to do with biological sex and b) Nothing to do with sexual attraction. Well what else are you left with?

I don't see how we can be talking about depression and anxiety triggers leading to suicide, without accepting that there's a fundamental mental health issue. If you can separate the two in your mind that's up to you but I think that takes a huge amount of cognitive dissonance. The link you've provided is from a support group which, well meaning is probably written by someone with a very obvious bias. I can't take that as being objective any more than I would a Christian parents support website, which promises summer camps to pray the gay away. If you're using a lack of validation as a trigger for suicide, well where else does that lead us? For e.g. 99.7% of the world are not Sikh, we believe that the most sacred beliefs they live their lives by are, to put it bluntly, nonsense. The argument that you need to share my beliefs or I'll kill myself is fundamentally awful, deeply manipulative a quite honestly gaslighting a society for simply saying, "I don't share your beliefs, which you present without evidence."

Alchemy, homeopathy and Wahhabi Islam were once radical new ideas, that doesn't mean they were good. Beware of labeling ideas as 'enlightened' simply because they are new. If you support the choice of gender identity, then you deny the existence of sexuality. You have to choose one. You cannot be gay if you walk into a gay bar and have no idea what anyone's chosen gender is. The whole non-binary argument is based on nothing more than sexist stereotypes. If you say you are non-binary because you don't conform to those stereotypes, all you are doing is reaffirming your belief that they must be true of other people. I'll give you another example; saying black teenagers carry knives is a negative stereotype. The correct response to which is to say that you don't carry a knife just because you're a black teenager. Your argument is the equivalence of saying, 'I don't carry a knife, therefore I'm not black'. You're not a woman because you don't wear dresses and nail polish? Well, you try telling a feminist that. The only people upset about genitals are the people who wish to deny the existence of biological sex. I'm perfectly happy with 500 million years of evolution via sexual reproduction, just stop telling me I need to believe something else that you can't even explain.

The Nagasaki Nesta returns! Probably the best backup CB we’ve ever had at Saints, couldn’t ask for a more model professional.

I respectfully ask that you adhere to my wish to be refered to in the second person pronoun of 'yarp', rather than 'you'. The difference being LGB people don't need to cut off parts of their body in order to be able to live with themselves. You can explain homosexuality, rationally and (if you wanted to) with clear evidence. I didn't want to put words in your mouth but I knew that argument was coming. There isn't a rough prison, school or neighbourhood in the world where anything close to 40% of people try to kill themself. The natural flight or fight reaction to danger is almost invariably to desperately try and escape that situation alive. I probably went to secondary school with 2,000 pupils across all the other years. Some of those students would have been regularly threatened at knifepoint on their estate, beaten senseless by their alcohol step dad, neglected by their prostitute drug addict mum or as you say, struggled with coming out as LGB (if it's 1 in 5 that's 400 students). I knew of one suicide the whole time I was there and that was a guy who'd left school, gone to uni and couldn't keep fighting his own internal demons, not even bullying related. I'm not trying to be rude but that's the kind of rationalising and rephrasing that just sounds like denial. Like saying people with alcohol problems aren't alcoholics, they just need alcohol in order to function normally. However you want to phrase it, all those issues are intrinsically linked to people with BDD.

But that's not the issue at all and it's indicative of why this has become such a highly charged political point, even if it's an incredibly tedious one. You can identify, dress, sleep with etc. whoever you like, all people are asking for is the right not to be involved. It comes down to a simple case of Hitchen's razor; you can have all the gender stuff, I'll give you the word 'gender' and you can identify as whatever you like on the proviso that I never have to pay any interest in it, like I don't with people's religions, diets or star signs. I'm perfectly happy with refering to people only by biological sex, when society deems it decent. The problem is that this right to refer to proven facts is now being eroded and people wont stand for it. Even people like Richard Dawkins, who has spent his life fighting against dogma, bigotry and voting liberal, is now under attack. Bringing it back on topic, Labour would be best served saying that the only thing they will legislate by is the proven biological definition of sex and leave it at that.

So the massive correlation with anxiety, depression, substance abuse, the need to surgically remove perfectly healthy organs and take testosterone blockers (even though it's definitely not biological) and the 40% attempted suicide rate are, in your view, entirely coincidental?

None of that is a definition of anything. If you believe sex and gender are different then you have to accept that: You aren’t assigned a gender at birth and you only have one if you choose to have one. What’s bemusing there is people who claim to be non-binary are effectively saying they don’t identify as something they’ve made up. I don’t choose to identify as a man and I’m not attracted to anyone based on gender. IF you want these rules to apply, then I am by definition a non-binary pan sexual and so are 99% of people. If sex and gender are different then there should be no issue at all. Separate society, where necessary (I.E. prisons, sports, changing rooms) based on sex and say that all genders are welcome in, for E.g. a woman’s changing room. The problem is that the very people who are insisting that they are different then immediately conflate the two by campaigning for the male sex who gender identify as female to be allowed in women’s spaces. Well, which is it? Are they the same thing or not?

There is no second definition of what a woman is, that’s precisely the problem they’ve got. They’re trying to stand on principals they can neither define, explain nor identify.

Have they? Of all the things they’ve done, I can’t say I’ve particularly noticed this being an issue.

Slight tangent, I decided to take all the lights out my living room this year and replace them with Philips Hue Bluetooth spot lamps. Looking back I can’t imagine the place without them, well worth the investment.

It’s a fair point but as of right now, neither of those teams is a rival. Many are predicting Ipswich in particular to drop away but until then it’s mainly just wishful thinking and a nine point gap will be very hard to overcome. Obviously things may look completely different in May, for E.g. West Brom might plummet into the bottom half and our head to head will seem irrelevant, retrospectively. As of right now though, we’re beating the teams around us in the table (WRBC were there or there about at the time we played them too) and that could prove crucial, much like the four points against West Ham last time.

That result was hugely frustrating at the time, coming only three games after our losing streak, but in the overall context of the last eight games it has actually aged a bit better. Better to draw that and win the games against Leeds, WBA and Hull, who are currently our main rivals. Im actually reasonably happy we played the good teams when we were sh*t. It’s better than wasting our winnable fixtures being sh*t, like Jones did last season.

I think the first part is the bit he was objecting to and I can see his point. I will be voting Labour at the next GE as the current government has quite clearly sh*t the bed, but it won’t be out of some sort of utopian dream, like the one SOG described.

Braverman didn’t have the same raw, untamed sexual magnetism that Patel brought to the table.

I think Carra may have just cum in his pants.

Broja wins Chelsea a stoppage time penalty. Cracking game, this.

Got a much worse save percentage than Luke McGee managed for Tranmere Rovers yesterday.

If we could manage to offload Adams and Mara in January and replace them with a single, vaguely competent striker, I’d be delighted.

I think it was August - November 2013, if we’re talking league games.

I'm not your guy, buddy!

Interestingly, not every paper thinks this was yesterday’s main new story.

5:45 for their goal, looks like Holgate is playing Bartley on at the time of the first header.