nourishing obscurity

25 Responses to “Pippa”

1. dearieme, on March 15th, 2013 at 14:41 Said:

   She is the prettier sister.

   
   
2. James Higham, on March 15th, 2013 at 15:25 Said:

   Second photo convinced you, Dearieme?
   James Higham recently posted…Pippa

   
   
3. Mark Wadsworth, on March 15th, 2013 at 15:46 Said:

   Lovely, but who has the cuter dimples, Our Pippa or Our Cheryl?

   
   
4. Humph, on March 15th, 2013 at 15:51 Said:

   Moist loaf but dat gyal is bare butters man! She just a fanny-man.

   
   
5. The Underdoug, on March 15th, 2013 at 18:38 Said:

   I thought the second photo (Pippa Drunk) was Julia Middleton of Common Porpoise infamy.

   For about 10s.

   
   
6. Suzie, on March 16th, 2013 at 07:15 Said:

   I think I must be the only person on the planet who thinks that neither of these two are unusually pretty. I could elaborate but it would be too mean. Also, can we mock some ugly men? It would make a refreshing change.

   
   
7. Amfortas, on March 16th, 2013 at 11:13 Said:

   I don’t think they are ‘unusually’ pretty Suz, but they do have a bit of sparkle. But I wonder how many women actually put grey streaks in their hair? Is this a fashion thing over there? She seems to scrub up well for the ice skating trips and has a neat bum, and, well, not to put too crude a point, I would not crawl over her to get to James.

   Two things Suz. If you look at my snap (see the right side bar) you could have a go at me for being ugly if you like. I can scrub up well for ice skating; and what are you like? Crawl to or over?

   
   
8. Suzie, on March 17th, 2013 at 01:34 Said:

   To be honest, I’m a little bit annoyed with myself for taking the bait on this one. Nobody deserves to be judged and criticised in this way and everybody has a gruesome, unflattering photo of themselves which never saw the light of day. It’s just that I am so monumentally bored by these two being shoved in our faces.

   As to what I’m like, I’d have to say over, and run a mile. I’m 55 years old. My husband shouts out in response to my asking for a rating, ‘tell them you were a ten’. It takes him five minutes to work out what he said wrong.

   A couple of years ago my daughter went to her school prom/graduation. As we got out of the car a man rushed over and told her how beautiful she was and I think it was in that moment that I handed over the baton. I am happy to grow old and wrinkly.

   One last thing which is bound to be controversial, especially with men. I was a huge admirer of Diana. She could look very beautiful on her day and she was a human being. I could relate to her with all her faults and insecurities.

   
   
9. James Higham, on March 17th, 2013 at 04:49 Said:

   Couldn’t disagree with any of that.

   Also, can we mock some ugly men? It would make a refreshing change.

   Sort of a Harmanesque quota, Suzie? I think the reason women get the attention vastly more is:

   1. This is a blog by mostly males.

   2. It’s women who present themselves to be judged this way. That might be men’s expectations to a point but it’s also something inside the woman who is concerned with her beauty. Men are probably concerned with prowess. That’s why beauty “contests” draw so many women – if they weren’t into them, the chauvinist men couldn’t get them interested. Be honest – would you willingly do something you don’t wish to when you don’t have to?

   3. Let’s face it, women are more beautiful although men can look fine and noble.
   James Higham recently posted…Karl on Obama called out by Forbes

   
   
10. Suzie, on March 17th, 2013 at 07:29 Said:

    Harmanesque? I wouldn’t have a clue. Certainly not consciously.

    I don’t think all women do present themselves to be judged. I never did.

    Beauty contests are old hat. I don’t know a thinking woman who would enter such a competition.

    Obviously, I would not do anything I didn’t wish to do if I didn’t have to. What do you mean?

    Men can be very good looking. It amuses me greatly that most men cannot admit that they know another man is good looking because they might be judged to be gay.

    
    
11. James Higham, on March 17th, 2013 at 11:22 Said:

    I don’t know a thinking woman who would enter such a competition.

    Those who think they have a good shot at winning it.

    It amuses me greatly that most men cannot admit that they know another man is good looking because they might be judged to be gay.

    Nowt to do with gay. It’s just something men are not into, not when there are women around.
    James Higham recently posted…Potpourri

    
    
12. Amfortas, on March 17th, 2013 at 11:34 Said:

    I can recognise and acknowledge a handsome man. I am not a bit ‘gay’. But most men who are not in the preening business, acting/singing/farting about on other TV shows, just do not care very much about male ‘looks’ despite what advertisers of ‘men’s grooming’ stuff would have us believe. Fail to mention it to them and the world does not turn sour.

    But fail to acknowledge a pretty woman and either all hell breaks loose or the temperature dips below freezing in the local area.

    On blogs, of course, there is a ‘visuals’ problem. But, never let a small problem get in the way…. you have a lot of very pretty words Suzie.

    

    
    
13. Don QuiScottie, on March 17th, 2013 at 21:00 Said:

    Prompted by Suzie I do have to agree that one issue sadly lacking coverage in this blog is the failings of men as a generalized gender (rather than just as individuals), whether in looks, or stupidity, or ability to mess everything up, or tendency to get promoted (dare I say “parachuted”) into high-ranking posts they are not competent for just because they are buddies with the incompetent guys already higher up. There are plenty such examples around, oh, and also of men over fifty wailing loudly at the passage of their powers – a category in which I include myself. There is a whole area of human failure and nonsense out there that does seem oddly ignored in the array of other sweeping generalisation on offer. Perhaps a topic for a new series James? I’ll humbly submit my photo, or you will find it on my blog, of a man whose looks have long gone and who stumbles onwards trying to succeed professionally at things probably now best left to, eh… to young females quite possibly If the general failings of men as a whole may be a step too far, how about a series of “men doing things they should have given up”. I can think of many rich rivers of ridicule to be drawn from.

    
    
14. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 00:34 Said:

    Submitted a comment, It didn’t appear so I submitted again, only to be told “It seems you have already made that comment”. Fair enough, but it still has not appeared. Glitch or disapproval?

    
    
15. James Higham, on March 18th, 2013 at 06:31 Said:

    You can be excused for not seeing the generalized comments about men’s failings for the simple reason that you are away from the blog a great deal and have not read all.

    There are many posts, DQS and they include criticisms of men. In posts about women in particular, I often criticize men so that’s not wholly valid as a criticism.

    As I say, you can be forgiven that.

    As for comments not coming through, it’s been doing some strange things of late – even I’ve found myself in spam, as has Amfortas and Cherie. The system seems to be picking on regulars and if I could give it a spank I would for doing that.

    We [techie and I] are looking into this but I suspect it is just overzealousness of the Antispam. As new terms are added to the Index, it seeks out those naughty things. Pain in the butt and I don’t like things which annoy readers [apart from myself]. Apologies on its behalf.

    As for agreeing with Suzie, well of course you would, laddie – you’re of the left.
    James Higham recently posted…For St.Patrick’s Day

    
    
16. Amfortas, on March 18th, 2013 at 13:31 Said:

    QuiScottie hangs to the left?

    
    
17. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 16:24 Said:

    ” you are away from the blog a great deal and have not read all.”

    Not so actually. I read every day, usually visiting more than once. It is my guilty secret.

    No Amfortas. I don’t “hang to the left”, at least not by most people’s definitions, but James uses his unique own definitions for many things. I have never voted Labour in my life, for example and am regularly accused by normal people of having many “right wing” views. Real life is so much more complex than these silly simplifications where one has to be either “right” or “left”.

    If James cannot see the blatantly uneven propensity towards sweeping negative generalisations regarding women in his blog, well… no point in trying to point it out.

    But I do enjoy visiting the old boy.

    (Coming next from James… the usual “But I adore women” protestations?)

    
    
18. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 17:00 Said:

    So… suggestions for some new series:

    Incompetent men in business and commerce

    Men who abuse their position to gain sexual favours

    The male propensity towards bullying

    Rapists of this world

    Men who start wars

    Men who make it unwise for women to walk home alone

    Ugly men on bicycles

    Ugly men not on bicycles

    Men who cannot even target the toilet bowl successfuly while pissing (about 90%?)

    Etc… It would be fun

    
    
19. CherryPie, on March 18th, 2013 at 22:21 Said:

    I don’t “hang to the left”, at least not by most people’s definitions, but James uses his unique own definitions for many things. I have never voted Labour in my life, for example and am regularly accused by normal people of having many “right wing” views. Real life is so much more complex than these silly simplifications where one has to be either “right” or “left”.

    Ditto apart from the fact I have ‘never’ being accused of any political views in the real world…
    CherryPie recently posted…Cherie’s Place – Thought for the Week

    
    
20. James Higham, on March 18th, 2013 at 22:39 Said:

    It’s very easily defined. If a person goes along with “banning”, as in “they should ban that”, that’s left. If a person believes in equality for women, gay marriage or unrestricted immigration, that’s left.

    If a person supports wind farms, Greenpeace, World Council of Churches, the UN and so on, that’s left. If that person attends environmental conferences, supports the welfare state and a fairer distribution of resources, that’s left because there is no such thing as “resources” to distribute anyway – it’s all someone’s money the State has taken.

    Letting criminals go free, esp. that rapist or those women who cry and are set free because of their “remorse”, that is left. Supporting the federalist top down EU, masquerading as bottom up, as in community councils – that is left.

    Siding with the employee before the shop owner is left, rather than taking issues on their merits. Social policy which requires government to enforce, asking people’s ethnicity on forms – that is left.

    Supporting State spending on projects is left as the right does not consider it’s the State’s money to distribute in the first place.

    Seeing shades of difference between social democrat and socialist is left. Believing in these things and denying one is left is left. Calling oneself or others by an ism is left. An anarcho-mercantilist, whatever it means, is left because only the left go in for such hair-splitting.

    Believing the C of E did not have the right to refuse women bishops is very leftist.

    Seeing social ills like gay marriage as a step forward is left. Regarding the breakdown of marriage and fatherless families as nothing much to worry about is very left. Considering you’re owed something for nothing is left. Believing social change or “reform” can be legislated for is left.

    Political correctness is left and not liking the term as applying to social distinctions, definitions and idiocy is very left. Banning certain words in books for being racist or sexist is very left.

    Believing everything’s relative, that there are no universal truths, only people’s opinions, is left. Seeing Blair as right wing and not left is very, very left. He’s the epitome of global socialist. Supporting government policies designed to bring about One United World of peace, harmony and fellowship is most left indeed. Trying to blend religions into one mish mash religion is leftist.

    Someone on the right supports the principles but not the government’s role in them.

    Those are some of the ways someone is left.

     
    James Higham recently posted…It’s neither more nor less than a global class war between a tiny elite and the vast masses of all hues

    
    
21. James Higham, on March 18th, 2013 at 23:03 Said:

    DQS – there are countless feminist tomes which go into all those – we’ve been flooded with that guff for decades. This blog is one small attempt to redress the imbalance a little.
    James Higham recently posted…It’s neither more nor less than a global class war between a tiny elite and the vast masses of all hues

    
    
22. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 23:08 Said:

    So, taking it from the top… by your definition, you yourself must be left wing if you think anything should be “banned”, eg murder, driving on the wrong side of the road, cleaning out oily tanker bilges offshore from beaches, rape, stealing your bike, spitting in your face, touching up little children, feeding alcohol to babies, depositing raw sewage in the streets, leaving a toddler in a house all day on their own, pissing and shitting on the seats in a bus…. Seriously? Nothing should be banned?

    Eh…. I could go on but I can’t be bothered. This is all so silly is makes me ponder a thought that I have often had, namely that this blog is actually a clever and hilarious parody. Perhaps that is why I enjoy it. And I do. I probably shouldn’t really bother commenting though.

    A similar list of what is right wing would be interesting, then I could determine whether, by your own personal definitions, I swing to the left or to the right.

    
    
23. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 23:12 Said:

    Our comments cross-posted, my previous being a response to the lefty issue rather than the women issue.

    On the women issue you say “we’ve been flooded with that guff for decades. This blog is one small attempt to redress the imbalance a little.”

    Ah… You mean to redress the imbalance a little with a dose of equal and opposite guff? OK. I think I understand now. Thanks.

    
    
24. James Higham, on March 18th, 2013 at 23:17 Said:

    No, I don’t mean that at all. I mean that all we get today is political correctness and this blog is a small attempt to redress the leftist guff we’re swamped with. Go to almost any pundit for man-bashing. The Guardian and Beeb are great for this. Read Toynbee for example.

    And as I said but it obviously wasn’t seen – I’ve written many things about men’s behaviour over the years. I wrote one today but perhaps you were a bit busy to see it:

    http://nourishingobscurity.com/2013/03/18/there-must-be-consequences-there-must-be/

    Here is some more to add to the previous, from American Thinker:

    “Leftism is at its heart the enemy of all empiricism. It grips fiercely the banner of idealism as if there were any special virtue in idealism.”

    Here’s another:

    “What does leftism offer? It aspires to steal from honest producers, to savage happy families, and to reduce its wretched camp followers to abject dependence. As Orwell so clearly saw in his dissection of an Inner Party member, leftism also forces its priesthood to actually persuade itself that the nonsense and contradictions it spouts are true. The end of this is nausea, tedium, and emptiness which infest and corrupt every crevice of thought and feeling.”

    Here’s a more intellectual definition:

    “V.I. Lenin castigated his opponents on the left in a 1920 book called “Left-Wing Communism”: an Infantile Disorder. A ruthless pragmatist who candidly acknowledged that power is the overriding issue of the revolution, the Bolshevik leader attacked proponents of “pure” Marxism — what would later be called “left communism.”

    The self-styled “revolutionaries” are predominantly liberal arts graduates and radical lawyers endowed with the gift of gab and a large stock of “progressive” catchphrases that roll off their tongues with effortless ease, like water off a duck’s back. As the years fly by, the revolutionaries may age physically; but spiritually and emotionally they stay stuck in a time warp.”

    Glad to have been of service.

     
    James Higham recently posted…It’s neither more nor less than a global class war between a tiny elite and the vast masses of all hues

    
    
25. Don QuiScottie, on March 18th, 2013 at 23:45 Said:

    re “Glad to have been of service. ”

    I am looking forward to more.

    As you invite on your comment form, “Don’t hold back.”

    I like reading you best when you don’t hold back.