Is this a painting that you would allow your wife or servant to view?
This feels like a cheesy publicity stunt - the kind of thing that never really provokes debate, just ranting in the Guardian's comments section.
The key sentence is tucked at the end of the article.
“We think it probably will return, yes, but hopefully contextualised quite differently. It is not just about that one painting, it is the whole context of the gallery.”
So, it is not really about whether the art should be on display, but about how it should be curated. At the moment it seems that it is not being done all that well.
That "hopefully" is a bit worrying, though. "Hopefully" we will not be totally useless at our job.
"Hopefully" this will put Manchester Art Gallery on the map, drive up our page views, get people here to see the outrage for themselves, and bring us plenty of $$$$.
Six Nations: the Scottish team has a player called Welsh. They're playing Wales. Hmm.
Originally Saxon for 'foreigner'. Probably means his family came from the ancient Kingdom of Strathclyde. Wales and Welsh have come to be the accepted terms for the Cymru, the country and Cymry the people.
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
Do these doctors also issue letters saying that the patient would be emotionally distressed if not accompanied by half a dozen F1 Grid Girls?
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
Do these doctors also issue letters saying that the patient would be emotionally distressed if not accompanied by half a dozen F1 Grid Girls?
I was once party to a discussion where a solicitor (retired) who'd worked on insurance fraud remarked of some medic that he'd sign anything if he was paid. The third chap in the discussion expressed total amazement that a doctor would do such a thing. He'd got to his 60's believing they were incorruptible.
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
Indeed. The name Wallace is from the same root. Cumbria is so called because it was one of the last places in what is now England to give up speaking Cymric.
a) Not to be independent - but have the issue close enough so it is always bubbling under the surface. b) To have the SNP in charge, but only just in Scotland c) To have a Labour government nationally, preferably in collusion with the SNP.
An unsatisfactory state for all the political parties.
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
Indeed. The name Wallace is from the same root. Cumbria is so called because it was one of the last places in what is now England to give up speaking Cymric.
There are two islands in the Firth of Clyde called the Cumbraes, I imagine almost certainly from the same root.
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
Indeed. The name Wallace is from the same root. Cumbria is so called because it was one of the last places in what is now England to give up speaking Cymric.
There are two islands in the Firth of Clyde called the Cumbraes, I imagine almost certainly from the same root.
Whereas the Mumbles, off Swansea have Viking names. As, to be fair does Swansea (Abertawe) itself.
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
Indeed. The name Wallace is from the same root. Cumbria is so called because it was one of the last places in what is now England to give up speaking Cymric.
There are two islands in the Firth of Clyde called the Cumbraes, I imagine almost certainly from the same root.
As we're talking about place names, it was interesting to read in The Norman Conquest, by Marc Morris, that Robert Curthose (which is Norman-speak for Robbie Shortarse), founded Newcastle.
King Cole, plenty of Vikingy places in Yorkshire, as well as Ireland too (Dublin, Waterford, and a few others, I think).
As we're talking about place names, it was interesting to read in The Norman Conquest, by Marc Morris, that Robert Curthose (which is Norman-speak for Robbie Shortarse), founded Newcastle.
King Cole, plenty of Vikingy places in Yorkshire, as well as Ireland too (Dublin, Waterford, and a few others, I think).
My mothers maiden name is supposed to show Viking ancestry. As does a tendency to trigger finger, which, over the years, has caused me some problems.
And I don't think Curthose means Shortarse; means he went about in short shorts. A tendency followed in Newcastle to this day, often by young women.
As we're talking about place names, it was interesting to read in The Norman Conquest, by Marc Morris, that Robert Curthose (which is Norman-speak for Robbie Shortarse), founded Newcastle.
[snip]
Really? Surely it was a Roman settlement, occupying such a strategic point on Hadrian's Wall?
Don't worry Malc, I'm sure PB will be putting up a piece on that poll shortly.
I'm sure it will - including the great surge in support for Independence......
Of course. I imagine the same people that were crowing over an MOE change in the Yougov as showing support for Indy was diminishing and the SNP honeymoon was over (part 274) will be back saying that 46-54 shows indy has stalled and the SNP being 17pts ahead of their nearest rival after 10 years in power is piss poor.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
Surely conditions are ripe for a return to the glory days of the trans Atlantic (and trans everywhere else) liners?
Queen Mary 2 (built in France) still does......though it takes longer now than it used to 100 years ago.....
It’s just taken me 2 hours to make a 10 mile journey from suburbia to Central London. The network is quite clearly falling to bits, the rolling stock hasn’t changed since I was a child, and yet they try to run more services!
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
Plucky Theresa doing her best agains the nasty men from thr EU?
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
The law doesn't say that. The law specifically described service animals, like guide dogs, and 'ESA' animals don't meet the bar. Pet owners just hope to cause the airlines enough embaressment to force them to allow their pet on with them.
This is causing huge problems for people with genuine service animals in America as they are getting backlash from people pushing back against bogus ESAs.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
Suspect this will be on she will win, actually.
There is no justification for post Brexit day arrivals to have the same permenant rights as pre Brexit day arrivals. Ditto for Brits abroad.
Wouldn't surprise me if this has been pre agreed, actually.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
The response on the radio this morning was very much on the lines 'good for her' 'tell the EU to get lost' and similar.
It was also noted yesterday that the public are increasingly blaming the EU.
Furthermore she does seem to be receiving considerable respect, even paper reviewers this morning saying how Prime Ministerial she looked in China.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
Did you see the ghost at Lumley? Allegedly an Aussie cricketer wouldn't sleep there a second night!
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
I hope you enjoyed it. Did you discover how to pronounce Chester-le-Street?
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
We had already been led to expect that free movement would continue until the end of the transition period, which makes sense if most other aspects of our current relationship with the EU also remain as-is during that period. So I'm puzzled why May has suddenly backtracked on this and put the far more important issue of our future trade relationship at risk. Perhaps she secretly suspects that we will be in a state of "permanent transition" throughout the 2020s (perhaps under a Labour government).
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
The law doesn't say that. The law specifically described service animals, like guide dogs, and 'ESA' animals don't meet the bar. Pet owners just hope to cause the airlines enough embaressment to force them to allow their pet on with them.
This is causing huge problems for people with genuine service animals in America as they are getting backlash from people pushing back against bogus ESAs.
I’ve heard it described as being under the Americans With Disabilities Act, the airline could be potentially sued by rich actress with a comfort pet dog and 10m Twitter followers, so they let these pets on the plane rather than test the law in court.
I agree it must be a nightmare for anyone deaf or blind with a genuine service dog caught in the backlash.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
Did you see the ghost at Lumley? Allegedly an Aussie cricketer wouldn't sleep there a second night!
I was on the look out for the ghost that traumatised Shane Watson, but didn't see it.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
I hope you enjoyed it. Did you discover how to pronounce Chester-le-Street?
All the time Theresa has the support of the Brexit Ultras, both in parliament and the media, she should be fine. This hapless minister can easily be dismissed as a saboteur/malcontent who should just sod off to the Lib Dems. It's when a hardcore Leaver who isn't Rees-Mogg (who's rather overplayed his hand of late) starts to criticize that things will start to look dodgy.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
Did you see the ghost at Lumley? Allegedly an Aussie cricketer wouldn't sleep there a second night!
I was on the look out for the ghost that traumatised Shane Watson, but didn't see it.
Mr. Herdson, I think it was ruins by the 1080s. So, you could argue the settlement was refounded, or that Newcastle (specifically) was founded then, on the site of an older, abandoned settlement.
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
IIRC, the Romans built a bridge over the Tyne between what are now Gateshead and Newcastle. No idea of the bridge situation by Norman times. Apologies if this is totally wrong!
I was up in the North East last weekend.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
I hope you enjoyed it. Did you discover how to pronounce Chester-le-Street?
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
We had already been led to expect that free movement would continue until the end of the transition period, which makes sense if most other aspects of our current relationship with the EU also remain as-is during that period. So I'm puzzled why May has suddenly backtracked on this and put the far more important issue of our future trade relationship at risk. Perhaps she secretly suspects that we will be in a state of "permanent transition" throughout the 2020s (perhaps under a Labour government).
Doesn't this mean that she is conceding Freedom of Movement during Transition but that arrivals after March 2019 will not have right of residence after Transition ends?
Off topic here, but just wanted to record my thanks to Cyclefree for her excellent article yesterday. Deliberately provocative but not invalidly so, it's a case that anyone who thinks (despite the evidence of last June), Corbyn can't win needs to answer.
Sure, there are differences too - most obviously Corbyn's lack of experience not just in government but in being part of any team where discipline matters. Even so, these are not as important as some think in restricting his capacity to win, though they would be in his capacity to govern.
No historic or international parallel works perfectly but the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater. As long as we understand and control for the differences, the similarities should tell us a lot.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
Suspect this will be on she will win, actually.
There is no justification for post Brexit day arrivals to have the same permenant rights as pre Brexit day arrivals. Ditto for Brits abroad.
Wouldn't surprise me if this has been pre agreed, actually.
Also telling that it's Verhofstadt who's kicking off, not the Commission or member governments.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
May will argue that EU immigrants will have to register post Brexit in March 2019. But there is nothing to prevent this being a requiremnet now. The only issue is whether post transition different rights then attach to those who entered and registered during the transition period.
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
Indeed. The name Wallace is from the same root. Cumbria is so called because it was one of the last places in what is now England to give up speaking Cymric.
There are two islands in the Firth of Clyde called the Cumbraes, I imagine almost certainly from the same root.
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
We had already been led to expect that free movement would continue until the end of the transition period, which makes sense if most other aspects of our current relationship with the EU also remain as-is during that period. So I'm puzzled why May has suddenly backtracked on this and put the far more important issue of our future trade relationship at risk. Perhaps she secretly suspects that we will be in a state of "permanent transition" throughout the 2020s (perhaps under a Labour government).
Doesn't this mean that she is conceding Freedom of Movement during Transition but that arrivals after March 2019 will not have right of residence after Transition ends?
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
The response on the radio this morning was very much on the lines 'good for her' 'tell the EU to get lost' and similar.
It was also noted yesterday that the public are increasingly blaming the EU.
Furthermore she does seem to be receiving considerable respect, even paper reviewers this morning saying how Prime Ministerial she looked in China.
And she may not back down
She is not going to take us over the cliff edge for this. I suspect what will happen is that there will be some kind of registration scheme and that will be presented as freedom of movement ending - though we could always have done it, but have chosen not to.
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
The law doesn't say that. The law specifically described service animals, like guide dogs, and 'ESA' animals don't meet the bar. Pet owners just hope to cause the airlines enough embaressment to force them to allow their pet on with them.
This is causing huge problems for people with genuine service animals in America as they are getting backlash from people pushing back against bogus ESAs.
I’ve heard it described as being under the Americans With Disabilities Act, the airline could be potentially sued by rich actress with a comfort pet dog and 10m Twitter followers, so they let these pets on the plane rather than test the law in court.
I agree it must be a nightmare for anyone deaf or blind with a genuine service dog caught in the backlash.
Comfort animals are illogical. If people are taking their beloved pets on board because they're extremely anxious about flying - and (presumably) catastrophise about the plane crashing - then why are they unnecessarily exposing the animal to such perceived danger?
On freedom of movement, I'm surprised that more publicity hasn't been given to the fact that it is the EU, not the UK, which proposes to deny the continuation of existing rights to EU citizens. Although they've agreed that EU citizens who happen to be British and who live in one of the EU27 countries will retain that right, they intend to take away their existing right to move to other EU countries. I suppose it is possible that Theresa May is trying to shift this position, or alternatively she might once again be setting herself up for backing down for nothing in return.
Also on Brexit, an important snippet in the FT:
Brussels describes the UK economy as too big and too close to treat like a normal trade partner and wants to define new ways to enforce restrictions on taxation, state aid, environmental standards and employment rights
The negotiators said any deal on future relations had to “cater to the specificities” of the UK-EU relations — implying the “depth and breadth” of relations justifies tighter controls than those expected of the US, Japan or Canada.
If that correctly describes Commission thinking, then it's interesting in two ways. Firstly, it shows that they are envisaging a much closer relationship than a Canada-style deal - something in fact, much like Theresa May's proposed deep relationship which they've previously dismissed as cherry-picking. Secondly, perhaps a future Labour PM won't be as free to wreck the economy with sixties-style intervention as Corbyn and McDonnell hope.
Finally: Osborne on the Today programme. Listen, and weep for what we have lost.
Yeah, cos that really is what is going on. Islamic law on the race track.
Exactly. No women F1 drivers need apply.
An anecdote from the race track. A decade or so ago, a young girl was doing fairly well in single-seater racing. A dad of a fellow competitor, hating seeing a girl beating his son, unzipped his flies directly before a race and peed into her fuel. She had to miss the race, and she stopped competing.
The son got dq'ed, and the dad banned, but I rather think that Mr Dancer and others are rather missing the big picture when it comes to women in motorsport.
But who cares, as long as they can ogle attractive women on the TV?
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
We had already been led to expect that free movement would continue until the end of the transition period, which makes sense if most other aspects of our current relationship with the EU also remain as-is during that period. So I'm puzzled why May has suddenly backtracked on this and put the far more important issue of our future trade relationship at risk. Perhaps she secretly suspects that we will be in a state of "permanent transition" throughout the 2020s (perhaps under a Labour government).
Doesn't this mean that she is conceding Freedom of Movement during Transition but that arrivals after March 2019 will not have right of residence after Transition ends?
Yep - that's the line she is taking.
And I honestly think she'll win it.
It sounds like what Barnier proposed to me. Storm in a teacup? Though Bojo and co want no FoM during transition.
Mr. Jessop, that's a sad story. That's only one side of things, though. We have a de facto team boss with Claire Williams, and, until recently, had another with Monisha Kaltenborn. More and more women are getting into engineering. It'd be great if we could have some female drivers (it's one of the few sports where direct competition would be possible between men and women), but I understand increasing numbers of women are competing in lower formulae.
Taking away grid girls doesn't magically create more engineering jobs that can only be done by women. All it does it is take work away from women.
Also, as I said yesterday, I hardly bother at all with pre- or post-race nonsense, so don't see the grid girls. My concern is with sacrificing freedom of choice and women's work on the altar of political correctness. There's nothing pro-women about making women poorer.
The Guardian has a piece this morning on 'emotional support animals', cconsequent on some American woman not being allowed to take her peacock on board an aeroplane. Ordinary commercial flight. Apparently it was an ESA, and therefore essential to her well being.
Bleeding Gordon Bennett!!!!
It’s a big thing among the first class flyers of California apparently. They get a letter from their doctor saying they’ll be emotionally distressed if their dog/cat/whatever isn’t allowed to fly with them in the cabin. Apparently this makes them ‘disabled’ according to law and the airline is bound to go along with the scam.
The law doesn't say that. The law specifically described service animals, like guide dogs, and 'ESA' animals don't meet the bar. Pet owners just hope to cause the airlines enough embaressment to force them to allow their pet on with them.
This is causing huge problems for people with genuine service animals in America as they are getting backlash from people pushing back against bogus ESAs.
I’ve heard it described as being under the Americans With Disabilities Act, the airline could be potentially sued by rich actress with a comfort pet dog and 10m Twitter followers, so they let these pets on the plane rather than test the law in court.
I agree it must be a nightmare for anyone deaf or blind with a genuine service dog caught in the backlash.
Comfort animals are illogical. If people are taking their beloved pets on board because they're extremely anxious about flying - and (presumably) catastrophise about the plane crashing - then why are they unnecessarily exposing the animal to such perceived danger?
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
The response on the radio this morning was very much on the lines 'good for her' 'tell the EU to get lost' and similar.
It was also noted yesterday that the public are increasingly blaming the EU.
Furthermore she does seem to be receiving considerable respect, even paper reviewers this morning saying how Prime Ministerial she looked in China.
And she may not back down
She is not going to take us over the cliff edge for this. I suspect what will happen is that there will be some kind of registration scheme and that will be presented as freedom of movement ending - though we could always have done it, but have chosen not to.
So she is right in challenging the EU and that seemed to be the publics view this morning
Is this a painting that you would allow your wife or servant to view?
This feels like a cheesy publicity stunt - the kind of thing that never really provokes debate, just ranting in the Guardian's comments section.
The key sentence is tucked at the end of the article.
“We think it probably will return, yes, but hopefully contextualised quite differently. It is not just about that one painting, it is the whole context of the gallery.”
So, it is not really about whether the art should be on display, but about how it should be curated. At the moment it seems that it is not being done all that well.
That "hopefully" is a bit worrying, though. "Hopefully" we will not be totally useless at our job.
"Hopefully" this will put Manchester Art Gallery on the map, drive up our page views, get people here to see the outrage for themselves, and bring us plenty of $$$$.
IMO the move is nicely of the zeitgeist.
I said cheesy, not unsuccessful In fact - I typed and then deleted "failed publicity stunt" because it definitely hasn't!
Mr. Jessop, that's a sad story. That's only one side of things, though. We have a de facto team boss with Claire Williams, and, until recently, had another with Monisha Kaltenborn. More and more women are getting into engineering. It'd be great if we could have some female drivers (it's one of the few sports where direct competition would be possible between men and women), but I understand increasing numbers of women are competing in lower formulae.
Taking away grid girls doesn't magically create more engineering jobs that can only be done by women. All it does it is take work away from women.
Also, as I said yesterday, I hardly bother at all with pre- or post-race nonsense, so don't see the grid girls. My concern is with sacrificing freedom of choice and women's work on the altar of political correctness. There's nothing pro-women about making women poorer.
That depends on what the women have to do to make them richer. FWIW, I dislike the objectification that the grid girls are clearly there to cater for and can well understand why the culture that uses them as such puts other women off becoming involved in the industry. To the extent that they do a useful job holding umbrellas or car number boards, no doubt they could still do that without the need for such figure-enhancing outfits, which would make the job opportunities more open.
WRT to the driving, I thought there was some evidence that in general, women don't perform quite as well as men under high-G force situations. Whether that general case still holds at the extremes (i.e. whether the tails to the ability-curve track each other), I don't know, but I can see how physiognomy of, say, neck muscles might make a difference in that respect in a way that it has less impact on, say, rallying or formula ford.
"But who cares, as long as they can ogle attractive women on the TV?"
What's wrong with appreciating a pretty woman? If you start banning that, the population explosion will be solved quickly. I'm sure you're aware of the 'Lysenko' problem in Russia during the 1930s?
The 'May' problem in the Conservative Party has no easy solution. If only she were a looker. And yes, I know I'm shallow.
Jonathan Portes misses the more serious point: Daniel Hannan still sees saboteurs everywhere.
I've found it hard to maintain my long-held respect for Daniel Hannan. I expected him to muck in, take some responsibility, and help make Leave a success, but he seems to prefer to stand to one side whilst critiquing everyone else.
By contrast, my respect for Gove remains immense (and Raab to a lesser extent) because both believe in it, are pragmatic, and are doing the hard graft to make it work.
(before anyone accuses me of the same, I applied to join DExEU to help out but I couldn't afford to take the £35k salary cut. If I could have, I would have.)
On freedom of movement, I'm surprised that more publicity hasn't been given to the fact that it is the EU, not the UK, which proposes to deny the continuation of existing rights to EU citizens. Although they've agreed that EU citizens who happen to be British and who live in one of the EU27 countries will retain that right, they intend to take away their existing right to move to other EU countries. I suppose it is possible that Theresa May is trying to shift this position, or alternatively she might once again be setting herself up for backing down for nothing in return.
Also on Brexit, an important snippet in the FT:
Brussels describes the UK economy as too big and too close to treat like a normal trade partner and wants to define new ways to enforce restrictions on taxation, state aid, environmental standards and employment rights
The negotiators said any deal on future relations had to “cater to the specificities” of the UK-EU relations — implying the “depth and breadth” of relations justifies tighter controls than those expected of the US, Japan or Canada.
If that correctly describes Commission thinking, then it's interesting in two ways. Firstly, it shows that they are envisaging a much closer relationship than a Canada-style deal - something in fact, much like Theresa May's proposed deep relationship which they've previously dismissed as cherry-picking. Secondly, perhaps a future Labour PM won't be as free to wreck the economy with sixties-style intervention as Corbyn and McDonnell hope.
Finally: Osborne on the Today programme. Listen, and weep for what we have lost.
The EU want to use the UK as a test-case to establish a new framework for countries that will always be close, but in the long-term might not fully join the EU. For example, the likes of the Ukraine and Turkey. A model that's somewhere between Norway and Canada.
That's not "cherrypicking" because it would be based on a new balance of rights &responsibilities and benefits, and something the EU could establish criteria around to offer it to others.
DavidL - Except Corbyn has the second highest record in the Commons for signing EDMs condemning Iran's human rights record, so it is being given short shrift by the sensible media as they know they are on a hiding-to-nothing. The hard-right fanatical lovers of grotesque Israeli human rights infractions at the likes of Guido's dreadful bilge-spewing site and 'Labour' Uncut (a front group for extreme right ultra-Blairite nutters) are out on a swivel-eyed limb with you here, I'm afraid.
If I wanted a fair honest assessment of Labour and I had the choice out of Labouruncut and conservativehome I would pick the latter, the labouruncut lot are so far out of the Labour mainstream that I wouldn't massively disagree with what one poster said earlier about these people preferring Theresa May.
I can at least have some respect for Dan Hodges (in this one limited aspect) in that he was a lot more honest about it and just joined the Conservative party, I think this lot have much more fun pretending to be Labour though.
Mr. Jessop, that's a sad story. That's only one side of things, though. We have a de facto team boss with Claire Williams, and, until recently, had another with Monisha Kaltenborn. More and more women are getting into engineering. It'd be great if we could have some female drivers (it's one of the few sports where direct competition would be possible between men and women), but I understand increasing numbers of women are competing in lower formulae.
Taking away grid girls doesn't magically create more engineering jobs that can only be done by women. All it does it is take work away from women.
Also, as I said yesterday, I hardly bother at all with pre- or post-race nonsense, so don't see the grid girls. My concern is with sacrificing freedom of choice and women's work on the altar of political correctness. There's nothing pro-women about making women poorer.
That depends on what the women have to do to make them richer. FWIW, I dislike the objectification that the grid girls are clearly there to cater for and can well understand why the culture that uses them as such puts other women off becoming involved in the industry. To the extent that they do a useful job holding umbrellas or car number boards, no doubt they could still do that without the need for such figure-enhancing outfits, which would make the job opportunities more open.
WRT to the driving, I thought there was some evidence that in general, women don't perform quite as well as men under high-G force situations. Whether that general case still holds at the extremes (i.e. whether the tails to the ability-curve track each other), I don't know, but I can see how physiognomy of, say, neck muscles might make a difference in that respect in a way that it has less impact on, say, rallying or formula ford.
There have been good interviews today from two ladies called Kelly Brook and Katie Price, who I think most British men have seen naked and have earned millions in the last 20 years. Both started modelling careers as grid girls and in similar promotional roles, Page 3 etc. It’s fair to say they don’t like the idea that a bunch of middle class feminists would deny them the same career choices now.
On female drivers, there have been a few, most notably Danica Patrick in US Indycars who’s won races. The G-forces are an issue, but we have female fighter pilots now so it can be overcome with sufficient training. The reasons there are so few women around F1 as drivers is that there are so few in the lower formulae. Increasing numbers of female engineers around though, which is a very good thing.
Off topic here, but just wanted to record my thanks to Cyclefree for her excellent article yesterday. Deliberately provocative but not invalidly so, it's a case that anyone who thinks (despite the evidence of last June), Corbyn can't win needs to answer.
Sure, there are differences too - most obviously Corbyn's lack of experience not just in government but in being part of any team where discipline matters. Even so, these are not as important as some think in restricting his capacity to win, though they would be in his capacity to govern.
No historic or international parallel works perfectly but the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater. As long as we understand and control for the differences, the similarities should tell us a lot.
Mr. Jessop, that's a sad story. That's only one side of things, though. We have a de facto team boss with Claire Williams, and, until recently, had another with Monisha Kaltenborn. More and more women are getting into engineering. It'd be great if we could have some female drivers (it's one of the few sports where direct competition would be possible between men and women), but I understand increasing numbers of women are competing in lower formulae.
Taking away grid girls doesn't magically create more engineering jobs that can only be done by women. All it does it is take work away from women.
Also, as I said yesterday, I hardly bother at all with pre- or post-race nonsense, so don't see the grid girls. My concern is with sacrificing freedom of choice and women's work on the altar of political correctness. There's nothing pro-women about making women poorer.
That depends on what the women have to do to make them richer. FWIW, I dislike the objectification that the grid girls are clearly there to cater for and can well understand why the culture that uses them as such puts other women off becoming involved in the industry. To the extent that they do a useful job holding umbrellas or car number boards, no doubt they could still do that without the need for such figure-enhancing outfits, which would make the job opportunities more open.
WRT to the driving, I thought there was some evidence that in general, women don't perform quite as well as men under high-G force situations. Whether that general case still holds at the extremes (i.e. whether the tails to the ability-curve track each other), I don't know, but I can see how physiognomy of, say, neck muscles might make a difference in that respect in a way that it has less impact on, say, rallying or formula ford.
AIUI women are, on a height-to-height basis, slightly more susceptible to G-forces (height and mass having more effect than gender: greater height makes you more susceptible, more mass less susceptible). However military studies have shown that any such differences are insignificant when it comes to fighter pilots, whose G-regime is probably harsher than F1.
Hence a trained short, muscular woman would have greater tolerance to G-forces than a trained tall, gangly man. Either man or woman, when trained, would beat an untrained person of either gender.
It should be remembered that many of the Mercury 13 women passed many of the same tests as the Mercury 7 men when it came to astronaut selection; they were not allowed to progress to further testing, although Funk privately did the phase-III tests and passed.
Jonathan Portes misses the more serious point: Daniel Hannan still sees saboteurs everywhere.
I've found it hard to maintain my long-held respect for Daniel Hannan. I expected him to muck in, take some responsibility, and help make Leave a success, but he seems to prefer to stand to one side whilst critiquing everyone else.
By contrast, my respect for Gove remains immense (and Raab to a lesser extent) because both believe in it, are pragmatic, and are doing the hard graft to make it work.
(before anyone accuses me of the same, I applied to join DExEU to help out but I couldn't afford to take the £35k salary cut. If I could have, I would have.)
So you put financial well-being ahead of (helping to bring about) sovereignty?
Mr. Herdson, worth noting that grid girls have been wearing more and more modest outfits recently, in F1 at least. Bikinis they are not.
I'd not heard the G-force comment, and find it slightly surprising given women make perfectly good fighter pilots. Obviously neck strength matters and that's easier for men than women, but we're only taking a few individuals so I can't see that being an insurmountable barrier.
"But who cares, as long as they can ogle attractive women on the TV?"
What's wrong with appreciating a pretty woman? If you start banning that, the population explosion will be solved quickly. I'm sure you're aware of the 'Lysenko' problem in Russia during the 1930s?
The 'May' problem in the Conservative Party has no easy solution. If only she were a looker. And yes, I know I'm shallow.
I'm not a puritan - I have no problem with pretty women being on TV to appeal to men (and vice versa). However there is a case of where it fits from a business perspective. The presence of a pretty woman that appeals to a man might repel a female viewer, and F1 wants (and needs) to be a global sport of appeal to both men and women.
The grid girls really serve no practical purpose that cannot be provided by alternative means, and IMO it makes no sense from a business perspective to keep them. And removing them frees up valuable room on the grid for the celebs and important people that is the *real* F1 business. (tm).
Presumably May is - once again - picking a fight she cannot win with the EU (over freedom of movement during the transition) because she feels she needs some positive headlines in the right wing press. But it's a stupid strategy - the inevitable backing down will make her look even weaker.
The response on the radio this morning was very much on the lines 'good for her' 'tell the EU to get lost' and similar.
It was also noted yesterday that the public are increasingly blaming the EU.
Furthermore she does seem to be receiving considerable respect, even paper reviewers this morning saying how Prime Ministerial she looked in China.
And she may not back down
She is not going to take us over the cliff edge for this. I suspect what will happen is that there will be some kind of registration scheme and that will be presented as freedom of movement ending - though we could always have done it, but have chosen not to.
At this stage the UK will only win cosmetic concessions on things the EU27 don't care about. FoM for their nationals was a key demand for most of them so it seems unlikely May will get her way on the end date. Maybe some meaningless register of aliens during the transition.
And here's something completely different. A nice phased photo from the Shanghai Meteorological Station of the recent moon eclipse:
Comments
Wales regularly played England at the start of his managerial career.
IMO the move is nicely of the zeitgeist.
Leavers: Ryanair sucks, EasyJet for us!!
EasyJet: Brexit sucks (http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/easyjet-blames-profits-slump-brexit-monarch-ryanair-a8066596.html)
Leavers: EasyJet, eh. You can tell it was set up by a European. Bloody traitors. That's why I only fly BA
BA: Brexit sucks (https://www.ft.com/content/d1440f12-6656-11e7-8526-7b38dcaef614)
Leavers: I only go on holiday in Cornwall.
Cornwall: Brexit sucks (https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/farm-tourism-jobs-cornwall-brexit-716108)
Leavers: [loudly] RULE, BRITANNIA!! BRITANNIA, RULE THE WAVES!! [waves flag]
The third chap in the discussion expressed total amazement that a doctor would do such a thing. He'd got to his 60's believing they were incorruptible.
I'm sure it will - including the great surge in support for Independence......
King Cole, good thinking, Batman. William Wallace was from that part of the world. Amusingly, his nickname during his life was William the Briton (as in Brythonic/Welsh Celt).
a) Not to be independent - but have the issue close enough so it is always bubbling under the surface.
b) To have the SNP in charge, but only just in Scotland
c) To have a Labour government nationally, preferably in collusion with the SNP.
An unsatisfactory state for all the political parties.
It's almost like there's a theme here; I just haven't teased it out yet.
This tweet gives you a flavour of Mike's take on it.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/958895878646960129
King Cole, plenty of Vikingy places in Yorkshire, as well as Ireland too (Dublin, Waterford, and a few others, I think).
And I don't think Curthose means Shortarse; means he went about in short shorts. A tendency followed in Newcastle to this day, often by young women.
I imagine the same people that were crowing over an MOE change in the Yougov as showing support for Indy was diminishing and the SNP honeymoon was over (part 274) will be back saying that 46-54 shows indy has stalled and the SNP being 17pts ahead of their nearest rival after 10 years in power is piss poor.
Strap the wheels to the goalposts lads..
That does raise an interesting debating point, though.
It was probably quicker before electrification.
This is causing huge problems for people with genuine service animals in America as they are getting backlash from people pushing back against bogus ESAs.
One night in Lumley Castle, then another night in the Vermont Hotel.
There is no justification for post Brexit day arrivals to have the same permenant rights as pre Brexit day arrivals. Ditto for Brits abroad.
Wouldn't surprise me if this has been pre agreed, actually.
It was also noted yesterday that the public are increasingly blaming the EU.
Furthermore she does seem to be receiving considerable respect, even paper reviewers this morning saying how Prime Ministerial she looked in China.
And she may not back down
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk
I agree it must be a nightmare for anyone deaf or blind with a genuine service dog caught in the backlash.
Sure, there are differences too - most obviously Corbyn's lack of experience not just in government but in being part of any team where discipline matters. Even so, these are not as important as some think in restricting his capacity to win, though they would be in his capacity to govern.
No historic or international parallel works perfectly but the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater. As long as we understand and control for the differences, the similarities should tell us a lot.
May will argue that EU immigrants will have to register post Brexit in March 2019. But there is nothing to prevent this being a requiremnet now. The only issue is whether post transition different rights then attach to those who entered and registered during the transition period.
That's a Cumbernauld joke. Sort of.
And I honestly think she'll win it.
Exactly. No women F1 drivers need apply.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/959006916579155974
Also on Brexit, an important snippet in the FT:
Brussels describes the UK economy as too big and too close to treat like a normal trade partner and wants to define new ways to enforce restrictions on taxation, state aid, environmental standards and employment rights
The negotiators said any deal on future relations had to “cater to the specificities” of the UK-EU relations — implying the “depth and breadth” of relations justifies tighter controls than those expected of the US, Japan or Canada.
https://www.ft.com/content/9052ed50-06d5-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5 [paywall]
If that correctly describes Commission thinking, then it's interesting in two ways. Firstly, it shows that they are envisaging a much closer relationship than a Canada-style deal - something in fact, much like Theresa May's proposed deep relationship which they've previously dismissed as cherry-picking. Secondly, perhaps a future Labour PM won't be as free to wreck the economy with sixties-style intervention as Corbyn and McDonnell hope.
Finally: Osborne on the Today programme. Listen, and weep for what we have lost.
The son got dq'ed, and the dad banned, but I rather think that Mr Dancer and others are rather missing the big picture when it comes to women in motorsport.
But who cares, as long as they can ogle attractive women on the TV?
See
https://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/iwonderwhy/12245/The-Osborne-Bull---a-brief-history.aspx
Taking away grid girls doesn't magically create more engineering jobs that can only be done by women. All it does it is take work away from women.
Also, as I said yesterday, I hardly bother at all with pre- or post-race nonsense, so don't see the grid girls. My concern is with sacrificing freedom of choice and women's work on the altar of political correctness. There's nothing pro-women about making women poorer.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/01/19/delta-tightens-leash-comfort-animals-flights-rules-lack-federal-regulation/1046380001/
WRT to the driving, I thought there was some evidence that in general, women don't perform quite as well as men under high-G force situations. Whether that general case still holds at the extremes (i.e. whether the tails to the ability-curve track each other), I don't know, but I can see how physiognomy of, say, neck muscles might make a difference in that respect in a way that it has less impact on, say, rallying or formula ford.
"But who cares, as long as they can ogle attractive women on the TV?"
What's wrong with appreciating a pretty woman? If you start banning that, the population explosion will be solved quickly. I'm sure you're aware of the 'Lysenko' problem in Russia during the 1930s?
The 'May' problem in the Conservative Party has no easy solution. If only she were a looker. And yes, I know I'm shallow.
By contrast, my respect for Gove remains immense (and Raab to a lesser extent) because both believe in it, are pragmatic, and are doing the hard graft to make it work.
(before anyone accuses me of the same, I applied to join DExEU to help out but I couldn't afford to take the £35k salary cut. If I could have, I would have.)
https://tinyurl.com/yatk9g6t
https://twitter.com/mikeysmith/status/959012585239728129
That's not "cherrypicking" because it would be based on a new balance of rights &responsibilities and benefits, and something the EU could establish criteria around to offer it to others.
As the dementia tax showed, the voters wont stomach economic hardship for long, they'll reverse Brexit PDQ.
I can at least have some respect for Dan Hodges (in this one limited aspect) in that he was a lot more honest about it and just joined the Conservative party, I think this lot have much more fun pretending to be Labour though.
On female drivers, there have been a few, most notably Danica Patrick in US Indycars who’s won races. The G-forces are an issue, but we have female fighter pilots now so it can be overcome with sufficient training. The reasons there are so few women around F1 as drivers is that there are so few in the lower formulae. Increasing numbers of female engineers around though, which is a very good thing.
Hence a trained short, muscular woman would have greater tolerance to G-forces than a trained tall, gangly man. Either man or woman, when trained, would beat an untrained person of either gender.
It should be remembered that many of the Mercury 13 women passed many of the same tests as the Mercury 7 men when it came to astronaut selection; they were not allowed to progress to further testing, although Funk privately did the phase-III tests and passed.
Funk presented an interesting program a couple of years ago:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p041b3yg
I'd not heard the G-force comment, and find it slightly surprising given women make perfectly good fighter pilots. Obviously neck strength matters and that's easier for men than women, but we're only taking a few individuals so I can't see that being an insurmountable barrier.
The grid girls really serve no practical purpose that cannot be provided by alternative means, and IMO it makes no sense from a business perspective to keep them. And removing them frees up valuable room on the grid for the celebs and important people that is the *real* F1 business. (tm).
And here's something completely different. A nice phased photo from the Shanghai Meteorological Station of the recent moon eclipse: