Category: Human issues

ethical issues and human interest stories

Truth and trust

Truth

There are a few themes running through this post and one is that I’ve had congenial neighbours for some months now [new ones] but of late they’ve been noisy in the middle of the night – so, yet another period of angst I see coming up. I need my sleep through the night.

A consequence of that is how selfish people are – they must know it’s not on during the night and yet they’re calling out, banging pots and pans and so on as if it were the daytime.

Let’s get off that and onto other matters.… More here ...

If we’re treading on thin ice, we may as well dance …

Not a reference to ice but to Royal Ascot.  I’m going to pull no punches about these damsels below.  The pics are by various sources at the Wail – by the time I composed this post and went to the Wail for the url, it had gone and become something about Sparkle.

Now, the theme of this post is what is nice and why, what is awful and why.

Nice and why

1. Age truly doesn’t come into it for me – if she holds and conducts herself as a lady, that will do me, thanks:

2. Possibly the nicest there:… More here ...

There’s a dark logic to today

This is a philosophical question. Toodles just finished Dark Logic and wrote [spoilers]:

Really, Jane? Sarah? Laura? MADDERS? Come on, can’t anyone be honest and true? Young, Jenny B, Madeleine….Maddy and retired old lady. Can count on one hand. True to real life.

It’s a reference to those who are not obviously crims but who turn out to be, if not crims, then people who let you down when you thought they were the most loyal people going. It’s been a motif in posts, which in turn sprang from the motif of Dark Logic, which in turn sprang from a quite jaundiced view of people in general today [posts passim], which in turn sprang from experiences.

Let me now divide the people of the world into three:

1. Those obviously malevolent – communists, RINOs, CINOs, Alinskys, Mays, Blairs, the Pope etc.

2. The vast majority who depend for their integrity and behaviour on their upbringing and so, if that upbringing was preaching the Christian virtues and looking down on failure to fly straight, saying that that is a bad thing, then these ordinary citizens will do the same.… More here ...

Wimmin on bikes – the defining episode

Me old mucker Microdave must be scratching his head wondering which pics of Wimmin on Bikes are acceptable and which are not – Dave’s much less complicated than I.  He wrote:

… and I hope at least some are O.K!

Uh Dave – hate to say this but your last lot were far better than these but I’ve extracted two to explain, then I’ll run a couple from your last lot, then two from elsewhere I find attractive myself.

I’m starting to suspect that I have a different approach altogether to wimmin, summed up by my mate here who said something like, “Unless they have big knockers and …”  The engineering approach, as opposed to the academic?  🙂

For me, femininity, not just to look at the shape of but in manner and style – they count heavily.

Anyway:

More here ...

What to do with a paedo …

… and other lowlifes?

It looked to be another of these reminiscences of life in luvvieland and then took off:

About a year ago, I was at one of those elitist dinner parties that the talk-radio guys are always going on about, albeit in the Swiss Alps rather than inside the Beltway—how’s that for one-upmanship? It was a very agreeable gathering at the end of a practically unimprovable week, but toward the end of the evening, an unexpected (by me, anyway) guest appeared: Roman Polanski.

That presented a dilemma both ethical and etiquettical. Does one meet Roman Polanski? Shake hands? Exchange pleasantries? Put on my critic’s hat and engage in a little friendly commentary? “I really enjoyed Chinatown, but I didn’t think Carnage quite lived up to the play. I’m not saying it was as bad as being drugged and forcibly sodomized, but, you know, John C. Reilly is no James Gandolfini.”

Tricky.

More here ...