So according to The Times, Jeremy Corbyn is going to announce today

[World's End Stella]

that Labour are going to run on a platform which includes unlimited EU immigration.

:hehe: I mean, he is aware of the Brexit vote, isn't he? :hehe:

[Burney]

that Labour are going to run on a platform which includes unlimited EU immigration.

:hehe: I mean, he is aware of the Brexit vote, isn't he? :hehe:

Given that Diane Abbott described all Brexit voters as stupid racists and Shami Chakhrabarti pleaded with Jews not to leave Labour and 'leave me alone in a room with Essex man', it seems safe to suggest that Labour are now interested in securing the votes of Guardian-reading public sector workers, media types and literally nobody else.

[World's End Stella]

Given that Diane Abbott described all Brexit voters as stupid racists and Shami Chakhrabarti pleaded with Jews not to leave Labour and 'leave me alone in a room with Essex man', it seems safe to suggest that Labour are now interested in securing the votes of Guardian-reading public sector workers, media types and literally nobody else.

Also, more power for the unions, £500bil public spend on infrastructure, rent controls, increased taxes on the wealthy and - Charles will love this - free university tuition for all. :hehe:

Did someone turn back a clock and make it 1955 again?

[Burney]

Also, more power for the unions, £500bil public spend on infrastructure, rent controls, increased taxes on the wealthy and - Charles will love this - free university tuition for all. :hehe:

Did someone turn back a clock and make it 1955 again?

£500 billion? :hehe: The best bit is that you just know that nobody's costed that out at all and that they've just pulled a massive arbitrary number out of their arses.

[World's End Stella]

£500 billion? :hehe: The best bit is that you just know that nobody's costed that out at all and that they've just pulled a massive arbitrary number out of their arses.

It gets better, their pitch will be that by spending £500bil we will reach 0% unemployment :clap:

[Sir C]

Given that Diane Abbott described all Brexit voters as stupid racists and Shami Chakhrabarti pleaded with Jews not to leave Labour and 'leave me alone in a room with Essex man', it seems safe to suggest that Labour are now interested in securing the votes of Guardian-reading public sector workers, media types and literally nobody else.

One can sympathise with Chakrabarti on this point, of course.

Did I mention that she's on my list? Yes, she's in!

[Sir C]

It gets better, their pitch will be that by spending £500bil we will reach 0% unemployment :clap:

We haven't even touched on unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from NATO yet. :clap:

[Viva Prat Vegas]

free university tuition for all. :hehe:


I will apply to study a degree course in Acute Paranoia at the David Lammy University , Tottenham

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Shami shouldn't knock Essex man. He ennobled her.

[Burney]

One can sympathise with Chakrabarti on this point, of course.

Did I mention that she's on my list? Yes, she's in!

Really? You can bet she's incredibly hairy down below, of course. :-(

[Sir C]

Really? You can bet she's incredibly hairy down below, of course. :-(

I've considered that. I'll send Laurie Penny in armed with a packet of disposable razors.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Really? You can bet she's incredibly hairy down below, of course. :-(

We live in hope.

[Burney]

It gets better, their pitch will be that by spending £500bil we will reach 0% unemployment :clap:

This despite the fact that it is by cutting public spending and encouraging capitalist endeavour that we have got unemployment down to record levels, of course? :hehe:

[Burney]

I've considered that. I'll send Laurie Penny in armed with a packet of disposable razors.

You'll need more than that. It's like steel wool, I reckon.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

You'll need more than that. It's like steel wool, I reckon.

Women have pubic hair. Little girls don't. Ugh.

[Sir C]

Women have pubic hair. Little girls don't. Ugh.

And men have hairy faces, little boys don't. Women have hairy legs, little girls don't.

[Burney]

Women have pubic hair. Little girls don't. Ugh.

Ermmm...you might want to consider rewriting that, m, as it could currently be read as a paean to the sexual attractiveness of little girls. :-(

NTTAWWI, of course.

[Burney]

And men have hairy faces, little boys don't. Women have hairy legs, little girls don't.

Presumably, mo sports a giant, Old Testament beard in order to ward off pederasts?

[World's End Stella]

This despite the fact that it is by cutting public spending and encouraging capitalist endeavour that we have got unemployment down to record levels, of course? :hehe:

I'd be surprised if he was capable of that level of analysis, Burney.

Tax rich. Spend money on jobs for poor. Unemployment goes down. Job done. I'm a genius.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Ermmm...you might want to consider rewriting that, m, as it could currently be read as a paean to the sexual attractiveness of little girls. :-(

NTTAWWI, of course.

Au contraire. I am a great supporter of hair. There is no reason to remove it on women's mons veneris other than the glut of American porn with shaved females which we have been fed with in the last 20/30 years. I suppose they didn't want to catch lice or whatever.

[Burney]

Au contraire. I am a great supporter of hair. There is no reason to remove it on women's mons veneris other than the glut of American porn with shaved females which we have been fed with in the last 20/30 years. I suppose they didn't want to catch lice or whatever.

Well no, it's about being able to see the old in-out a bit more clearly in the porn, apparently.

I prefer a well-kept thatch to a completely bald situation, but these are merely matters of taste. There is no logic in linking a chap's preference for a fully-depilated private pussy area to a desire to have sex with little girls any more than there is logic in saying a woman preferring a clean-shaven man indicates that she wants to have sex with little boys.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Not all men who like shaved pussies are pedos but all pedos love bald pussies. It's a bit like your take on Muslims and terrorists isn't it?.

Not a good analogy that. I wasn't advocating bearded ladies. A woman who does prefer a man with shaved pubic hair might well be odd, yes.

[Burney]

Not all men who like shaved pussies are pedos but all pedos love bald pussies. It's a bit like your take on Muslims and terrorists isn't it?.

Not a good analogy that. I wasn't advocating bearded ladies. A woman who does prefer a man with shaved pubic hair might well be odd, yes.

You seem better informed about what pâedos love than I, I must admit. Presumably, pâedos also like hairless armpits, hairless legs and unpacked eyebrows? By your logic that means that any man who prefers a woman with shaved legs, armpits or plucked eyebrows is a suspected pâedophile.

And that's not even remotely like my take on muslims and terrorists - not least because I don't think all terrorists are muslims.

Yours is a classic false syllogism, I'm afraid: 'pâedophiles are attracted to children and children have no public hair therefore men who like women with no pubic hair are pâedophiles'. It's pisspoor logic.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

You seem better informed about what pâedos love than I, I must admit. Presumably, pâedos also like hairless armpits, hairless legs and unpacked eyebrows? By your logic that means that any man who prefers a woman with shaved legs, armpits or plucked eyebrows is a suspected pâedophile.

And that's not even remotely like my take on muslims and terrorists - not least because I don't think all terrorists are muslims.

Yours is a classic false syllogism, I'm afraid: 'pâedophiles are attracted to children and children have no public hair therefore men who like women with no pubic hair are pâedophiles'. It's pisspoor logic.

I'm not going to dig out all the snide little posts from the past which refute that comment.

I assume you know about anatomy and you know about how humans mature. You therefore know kids are hairless. Pedos like kids and on e of the distinguishing things about them is they are hairless. It isn't rocket science.

[Sir C]

I'm not going to dig out all the snide little posts from the past which refute that comment.

I assume you know about anatomy and you know about how humans mature. You therefore know kids are hairless. Pedos like kids and on e of the distinguishing things about them is they are hairless. It isn't rocket science.

Have you ever burned down a podiatrist's office, m?

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Haven't done a lot burning worth mentioning really Sir C. You?

[Burney]

I'm not going to dig out all the snide little posts from the past which refute that comment.

I assume you know about anatomy and you know about how humans mature. You therefore know kids are hairless. Pedos like kids and on e of the distinguishing things about them is they are hairless. It isn't rocket science.

Well no, it's not rocket science - that much is abundantly clear.

As I have pointed out, hairlessness applies to areas other than the pubis, which means you must equally ascribe pâedophilic tendencies to any man who prefers hairlessness in his women in any of these areas as well.
If you prefer a woman with shaved legs, you are therefore just as suspect as the man who prefers a woman with no pubic hair. The only way your argument can even be internally consistent is if you admit that your type is something that resembles Sasquatch. :hehe:

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Well no, it's not rocket science - that much is abundantly clear.

As I have pointed out, hairlessness applies to areas other than the pubis, which means you must equally ascribe pâedophilic tendencies to any man who prefers hairlessness in his women in any of these areas as well.
If you prefer a woman with shaved legs, you are just as suspect as the man who prefers a woman with no pubic hair. The only way your argument can even be internally consistent is if you admit that your type is something that resembles Sasquatch. :hehe:

What I have said is that pedos like baldness in the pubic area. Fact. Legs, unless you have some wonderful fetish unknown to me, are not normally associated with sex.

My type is a stunningly feminine and beautiful woman with a huge thatch. The acknowledgment of our animal origins amidst the artificiality of cosmeticised femininity.

[Burney]

What I have said is that pedos like baldness in the pubic area. Fact. Legs, unless you have some wonderful fetish unknown to me, are not normally associated with sex.

My type is a stunningly feminine and beautiful woman with a huge thatch. The acknowledgment of our animal origins amidst the artificiality of cosmeticised femininity.

Legs have nothing to do with sex? :yikes: :hehe: In the Team GB Paralympic Village maybe.

You're reaching here and failing badly, I'm afraid. The removal of natural adult body hair on legs and armpits is done for aesthetic reasons based on the preferences of the individual and their sexual partner. Why, then, can you not accept that the depilation of the pubis is in the same category?

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Legs have nothing to do with sex? :yikes: :hehe: In the Team GB Paralympic Village maybe.

You're reaching here and failing badly, I'm afraid. The removal of natural adult body hair on legs and armpits is done for aesthetic reasons based on the preferences of the individual and their sexual partner. Why, then, can you not accept that the depilation of the pubis is in the same category?

Which sexual act involves the legs other than as support???

Depilation of the pubis as you put it is a very recent phenomenon except for prostitutes who used it for reasons explained in an earlier post. It's not aesthetics, it's forced conformism. Like the pressure on kids to get tattoos and piercings.

[Burney]

Which sexual act involves the legs other than as support???

Depilation of the pubis as you put it is a very recent phenomenon except for prostitutes who used it for reasons explained in an earlier post. It's not aesthetics, it's forced conformism. Like the pressure on kids to get tattoos and piercings.

Actually, pubic depilation has been going on for thousands of years. It's only relatively new in northern European societies. In civilisations like Egypt and Greece it was de rigeur for both sexes, while in the Middle East it's been standard practice among women for a long time.
And I struggle to see how you distinguish between the 'forced conformism' of leg hair removal and the forced conformism of pubic depilation. Both are simply fashions since there is nothing objectively more attractive about a hairless leg and a hairy one other than what is dictated by societal norms and fashion.

And a woman's legs are a major factor in sexual attraction and arousal, as ZZ Top will tell you.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Sexual attraction is not part of any sexual act.

You may not know this but increasingly kids are learning about sex from the internet. And this is dominated by Amercian porn of the ilk I already explained to you before. Girls are being urged to remove their hair the minute it starts growing. There is waxing in salons for preteen girls for chrissake. Who are they supposed to be attracting?

****ing on top of icebergs has probably been going on since the Ice Age. That doesn't mean it was the norm at the time.

[redgunamo]

Sexual attraction is not part of any sexual act.

You may not know this but increasingly kids are learning about sex from the internet. And this is dominated by Amercian porn of the ilk I already explained to you before. Girls are being urged to remove their hair the minute it starts growing. There is waxing in salons for preteen girls for chrissake. Who are they supposed to be attracting?

****ing on top of icebergs has probably been going on since the Ice Age. That doesn't mean it was the norm at the time.

I must be on the wrong internet. Mine is dominated by American Express bills and pictures of dogs running :-(

[Burney]

Sexual attraction is not part of any sexual act.

You may not know this but increasingly kids are learning about sex from the internet. And this is dominated by Amercian porn of the ilk I already explained to you before. Girls are being urged to remove their hair the minute it starts growing. There is waxing in salons for preteen girls for chrissake. Who are they supposed to be attracting?

****ing on top of icebergs has probably been going on since the Ice Age. That doesn't mean it was the norm at the time.

'Sexual attraction is not part of any sexual act' - You really are coming up with some corkers today, m! :hehe: :clap:

Regardless of what drives fashion, that's all it is - fashion. And it applies as much to the body as to clothes. Leg hair removal is a relatively modern fashion, as is armpit hair removal, but you don't seem to regard these as problematic. Girls pierce their ears and shave their legs and armpits as a way of being grown up. If pre-teen girls are being waxed that is very silly, but hardly a reason to decry the very act of pubic depilation. You just seem to want to treat as somehow immoral a practice that happens not to be to your taste while ignoring or actively encouraging entirely similar practices that are to your taste. That is utterly hypocritical and not a sound basis for your argument.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

'Sexual attraction is not part of any sexual act' - You really are coming up with some corkers today, m! :hehe: :clap:

Regardless of what drives fashion, that's all it is - fashion. And it applies as much to the body as to clothes. Leg hair removal is a relatively modern fashion, as is armpit hair removal, but you don't seem to regard these as problematic. Girls pierce their ears and shave their legs and armpits as a way of being grown up. If pre-teen girls are being waxed that is very silly, but hardly a reason to decry the very act of pubic depilation. You just seem to want to treat as somehow immoral a practice that happens not to be to your taste while ignoring or actively encouraging entirely similar practices that are to your taste. That is utterly hypocritical and not a sound basis for your argument.

It isn't part of the act. Sorry if you don't understand that.

Yes, everyone in Mao's China got this sudden penchant for those nice suits.

You still don't understand. What I am saying merely is pubic hair is natural, completely shaving it is not. But there is an entire sub-culture out there which has become mainstream and is bludgeoning people into believing and accepting the opposite of the truth.

[Burney]

It isn't part of the act. Sorry if you don't understand that.

Yes, everyone in Mao's China got this sudden penchant for those nice suits.

You still don't understand. What I am saying merely is pubic hair is natural, completely shaving it is not. But there is an entire sub-culture out there which has become mainstream and is bludgeoning people into believing and accepting the opposite of the truth.

Sexual attraction is fundamental to the act and for most men, a woman's legs are a major source of that attraction. And, because of our conditioning and societal expectations AND NOTHING ELSE, most of us are more attracted to women with shaved legs than to those with hairy legs. Indeed, to be attracted to unshaven women - or as you would doubtless put it 'natural women' is now seen as a fetish. Why? Because society, media and fashion have dictated what the norms are.

The fact that a sub-culture is now mainstream is not necessarily a bad thing. There was a time not that long ago when kids literally reached sexual maturity with only the vaguest idea of what the other sex's sexual organs looked like and fúck all idea of how they worked. Thanks in no small part to porn, that is no longer the case. The flip side of that, of course, is that the sexual expectations of the average boy may have gone the other way and become rather unrealistic, but that is another question. One could argue that they have swapped one type of ignorance for another, but of all the problems associated with the increased pornification of society, the demise of the hairy fanny is hardly the most worrying and certainly has nothing to do with pâedophilia (your original argument).

As to 'natural', well I have some problems with that term. What is 'natural' is not per se good. Blowjobs aren't 'natural', but I take it you wouldn't attempt to dissuade women from dispensing them? Equally, I don't think any adult male actually thinks pubic hair is unnatural, merely unsightly or not to their taste. Nobody has been 'bludgeoned' into accepting a lie as truth, a set of circumstances has simply arisen that have altered people's tastes and expectations in a singularly harmless way. I don't see the problem.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Sexual attraction is only fundamental in attracting someone, it is not part of the act. I am attracted to 10,000 women every day, sadly I do not have sex with them.

I am surprised that your libertarian instinct do not instinctively blench at how a minority has been allowed to impose its views, despite their being wrong even on health grounds, through the brainwashing and manipulation of an entire generation.

I hope to hear you express the same views on sub-cultures if ever we are unlucky enough to see Corbyn entering into no. 10.

[Burney]

Sexual attraction is only fundamental in attracting someone, it is not part of the act. I am attracted to 10,000 women every day, sadly I do not have sex with them.

I am surprised that your libertarian instinct do not instinctively blench at how a minority has been allowed to impose its views, despite their being wrong even on health grounds, through the brainwashing and manipulation of an entire generation.

I hope to hear you express the same views on sub-cultures if ever we are unlucky enough to see Corbyn entering into no. 10.

But nobody has imposed any views on anyone. A technological leap has simply created a new norm in the same way that the invention of the internal combustion engine and mass production techniques made car ownership a new norm. That is not brainwashing, it is a choice.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Yes, the American porn industry has.