JonnyF

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I'm also straight but attraction to ladyboys is not straight no matter what gay men might tell you.

Well, the fact that straight men sometimes pick them up by accident without knowing they are ladyboys tells you that some of them are attractive to straight men. 

Obviously picking them up knowing they are Ladyboys is different, but since gay men never do that I believe it is a straight thing. If they were gay, why not just pick up a "normal" gay bloke? It's not like there's a stigma to that. It's probably because they are not attracted to "normal" gay blokes, because they are straight.

Again, I am prepared to be corrected by one of the gay forum members if they like Ladyboys. But every gay bloke I've spoken to finds them very unattractive and wouldn't even consider going with one. Why? Because they look like women whereas they are attracted to men.

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Utter rubbish on all levels. It's illogical to suggest that having gay sex is "straight". What does that term then mean? Have you been engaging in guilty pleasures?

Whilst it's certainly not for me (I'm straight) and frankly I avoid them like the plague, any gay man will tell you that attraction to Ladyboys is a straight thing.

I've never known a gay man who likes them. I've met quite a few straight blokes who have a dabble now and then. One of them was engaged to a very cute American girl and was basically what some would refer to as a Chad. 

Maybe some of the gay forum members could confirm?

1 hour ago, Credo said:

One of my kids and I go around and around about LGBTQ issues.  He's very conservative, I am much more liberal. While visiting, my granddaughter (18 years old)  and her boyfriend were there for dinner, so I asked her about gender/sexuality issues.  She seemed confused why I asked.  Her boyfriend said, "Oh, isn't your friend bisexual", she said, "no, that was last week, now she's pansexual."   Neither of them seemed to have much interest in anyone's sexuality, sexual identity, gender identity or any thing have to do with their sexual preferences.   

I'd imagine they found it very awkward. I'm not surprised she was confused, she probably didn't want to talk to you about it.

I certainly wouldn't have wanted to talk to my GrandParents about sexuality when I was 18. It's a bit cringe.

4 hours ago, Credo said:

I saw the episode.  I didn't find it all that funny, but it is very well done, as are most episodes of South Park.   

 

I've been reading Harry's book, "Spare".   An interesting book.  It sheds a lot of light on a lot of different subjects.  I think that perspective made the South Park episode a little less funny.   

 

I thought it was funny. Not laugh out loud type funny, more of a cringe induced giggle as you watch it through your fingers thinking "I can't believe they've done that".

The World Wide Privacy Tour ????. They just nailed it in every possible way. Absolutely brutal the way they surgically dissected the hypocrisy and ridiculousness of the couple. Brilliantly done. 

Great news. Let her spend the rest of her days in a cave in Syria somewhere. The UK could do without such revolting characters sullying it's shores.

Good riddance.

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I doubt the local residents or Nicola Bulley’s family will agree with you.

 

I beg to differ.

I'm pretty sure the family will be more concerned with what happened to Nicola than worrying about some TikTok'er trespassing on someone's back garden.

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Harassment, Trespass, Illegal Entry would be a start:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/security-patrols-area-nicola-bulley-29191353

 

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/23322156.nicola-bulley-two-arrested-malicious-communications/

I think the police/courts have more important issues to attend to than someone walking through someone else's garden ????.

Maybe their efforts would be better spent finding out what happened to Nicola? 

On 2/20/2023 at 8:05 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Perhaps the police will have some time now to prosecute the goulish ‘influencers’ and ‘youtubers’ who have descended on the area causing so much distress to Nicola’s family and in the local community:

Prosecuted for what crime?

Hanging around a public place taking photos?  

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

A bit of light hearted racism is never acceptable. Poking fun at Scousers isn't racism.

It isn't racist to tease a cult hero about his choice of meat.

Just like teasing a Scotsman about eating haggis in Scotland isn't racist against the Caucasian race.

You'd cry racist if someone asked their Irish pal if he wanted a pint of Guinness ????. 

Just now, ozimoron said:

As far as I can tell that slur was directed at a single individual. Can you spot the difference?

Yes I can.

A bit of light hearted teasing/banter with one of your own players (that the fans pretty much worship) is far less serious than a slur that tarnishes a whole group of people such as the fine upstanding people of Liverpool.

Great point. Thanks for pointing that out. 

6 minutes ago, RickG16 said:

Park made a video for United fans (after he retired) telling them he appreciates them singing his name but pleading with them to stop singing this song.

 

However you try to dress it up, the dog slur is deeply offensive to Koreans.

It's deeply offensive to Scousers as well. 

I'm going to guess you're not so concerned about that though.

It would appear that anything short of skipping down the road in gender neutral rainbow attire, sporting pink dreadlocks and screaming "Racist" at random passers by is deemed "far right" now ????.

Many places are governed at least partially according to religious beliefs/values. Try getting a beer in a Gogo bar on Makha Bucha day in Thailand, for example. Or listen to Prayut spouting off about Buddhist precepts.

2 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

It's cheaper to stick with tubed tyres and inner tubes. 

 

If punctured riding around on a farm just stick another inner tube. 

 

With a punctured tubeless tyre your probably end up putting an inner tube in that to. 

Punctured tubeless tyres are much easier to fix, no need to remove the wheel/tyre, a 2 minute job.

Also seems to happen much less often with tubeless. 

11 minutes ago, Tug said:

This ruling will lead to much suffering and misery for these unfortunate outcasts I fear it will lead some to take their lives and don’t spout republican (delet)about not wanting big government they don’t belong trying to regulate something like this a major overreach imo and political theater 

If minors want to dress like the opposite gender, boys wearing skirts, makeup etc. then they are free to do so. 

But allowing them to make permanent, life changing modifications to their bodies before they've stopped developing mentally is deeply irresponsible IMO. So they can't drink, can't get a tattoo, can't vote but they can get their breasts/penis removed? Nah, that's ridiculous.

Good move.

Minors should be prevented from making life changing changes to their bodies before their mind has fully matured.

https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/detransitioned-teens-explain-why-they-regret-changing-genders/

Same as Prayut was only going to be there 6 months? ????

Fool me once...

20 minutes ago, MartinL said:

There isn't "only one hole in the rim for the valve", there are LOTS of holes for spokes too which would permit the escape of air.

 

Use tubeless tyres by all means BUT use an inner tube too.

It's a mag wheel. 

I'm replacing the very old tyres and tubes on my very old Nouvo MX that I occasionally use on the farm. 

When I removed the old tyres and tubes, the rims look like they can take tubeless tyres. Anyone know for sure? The research I've done looks like they can.

Here is a cross section of the rim. There is only one hole in the rim for the valve.

Here is a diagram that leads me to believe the rims can accept tubeless hookless tyres.

Anyone know for sure?