"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with holes to
receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides being put together is called mating”.
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't it?
If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it, it is female.
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
On 2/6/25 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
So they were in favour of giving kids Lego?
Although I like science, I preferred the Natural History Museum, next door.
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with holes to
receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides being put together is called mating”.
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc,The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
isn't it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit
into it, it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
On 06/02/2025 in message <vo2dlp$2vck0$2@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
A self-guided museum tour on stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
is the norm.
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
On 06/02/2025 in message <vo2dlp$2vck0$2@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:32:41 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc,
isn't it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit
into it, it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
As, of course, it is. If these nutcases' ancestors hadn't thought that heterosexuality was the norm, they wouldn't be around to complain.
What is really annoying, is not that the nutcases say these things (as
they do just to annoy normal people) but that they're doing it at
taxpayers' expense.
I wonder if Trump will lend Elon Musk to us when he's finished draining
the US swamp. It's quite entertaining seeing what USAID has been
funding, the BBC among other things.
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with holes to
receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides being put together is called mating”.
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:My wife - a biologist - tells me that wild animals turn homosexual when
On 06/02/2025 in message <vo2dlp$2vck0$2@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
A self-guided museum tour on stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality is the norm.
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
My thoughts exactly
In time the LBGTQ community will breed themselves into extinction...
--
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
My wife - a biologist - tells me that wild animals turn homosexual when
their living space becomes overcrowded. Maybe humans do the same.
On 2/6/25 17:45, charles wrote:
My wife - a biologist - tells me that wild animals turn homosexual when
their living space becomes overcrowded. Maybe humans do the same.
Maybe she wants you to build the extension she has been asking for.
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
On 2/6/25 17:45, charles wrote:
My wife - a biologist - tells me that wild animals turn homosexual when their living space becomes overcrowded. Maybe humans do the same.
Maybe she wants you to build the extension she has been asking for.
In article <vo2ns2$31de5$1@dont-email.me>,
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:My wife - a biologist - tells me that wild animals turn homosexual when
On 06/02/2025 in message <vo2dlp$2vck0$2@dont-email.me> The NaturalMy thoughts exactly
Philosopher wrote:
A self-guided museum tour on ”stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities• includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality ”is the norm•.
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
In time the LBGTQ community will breed themselves into extinction...
--
their living space becomes overcrowded. Maybe humans do the same.
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or
On 06/02/2025 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
Well surely the fact that Lego bricks comes in all different colours,
there's representation for each of the colours used on the LGBTQIA+
Pride Flag?
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:32:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't it? >>> If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it, it is
female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
Well it is, isn't it? 'norm' refers to the majority.
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male
penetrating the female which is apparently insulting to arse bandits
,lezzers and boys in frocks.
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male penetrating
the female which is apparently insulting to arse bandits ,lezzers and
boys in frocks.
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it,
it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities, experiences
and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks alongside a guide
stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea that heterosexuality
“is the norm”.
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
On 07/02/2025 in message <vo4tq8$3g24n$1@dont-email.me> Vir Campestris
wrote:
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be
no life on Earth.
An awful lot of life reproduces by asexual division. Important crops
like potatoes and bananas are produced that way - the potato flowers
and berries aren't used much.
But I take your point.
Andy
Quite rare to see potatoes running round shagging each other :-)
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
An awful lot of life reproduces by asexual division. Important crops like >potatoes and bananas are produced that way - the potato flowers and
berries aren't used much.
But I take your point.
Andy
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male penetrating
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......
the female which is apparently insulting to arse bandits ,lezzers and
boys in frocks.
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be no
life on Earth.
An awful lot of life reproduces by asexual division. Important crops
like potatoes and bananas are produced that way - the potato flowers and berries aren't used much.
But I take your point.
Andy
On 07/02/2025 01:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community,
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of
the brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick
with holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the
two sides being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......
or someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male
penetrating the female which is apparently insulting to arse
bandits ,lezzers and boys in frocks.
Perhaps clarification should be made to refer male to 'top' and
female to 'bottom'. Some of the LGBTQ+ community might agree?
On 07/02/2025 01:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or
someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male
penetrating the female which is apparently insulting to arse
bandits ,lezzers and boys in frocks.
The OP forgot to say he was talking about LEGO bricks.
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't it?
If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it, it is female.
On 06/02/2025 13:42, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the >>>>> brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't
it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into
it, it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
So they were in favour of giving kids Lego?
Although I like science, I preferred the Natural History Museum, next
door.
Haven't been to either in years. Went to the British a while back, and
the V & A.
On 06/02/2025 01:21 PM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc,
isn't it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit
into it, it is female.
Absolutely correct. Standard engineering and electrical practice and nomenclature for over a hundred years.
On 06/02/2025 01:21 PM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't it?
If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it, it is
female.
Absolutely correct. Standard engineering and electrical practice and nomenclature for over a hundred years.
I hadn't realised how much 1950s kitsch homeware and furniture had been inspired by that festival. Not that we had any of it. It was still 1905
as far as my grandmother was concerned.
On Sat, 08 Feb 2025 15:16:14 +0000
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 06/02/2025 01:21 PM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc,
isn't it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit
into it, it is female.
Absolutely correct. Standard engineering and electrical practice and
nomenclature for over a hundred years.
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether
they realise it or not.
On 07/02/2025 13:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/02/2025 in message <vo4tq8$3g24n$1@dont-email.me> Vir CampestrisOOh Arrgh., You haint bin down tham there potato fields on a moonlit
wrote:
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:Quite rare to see potatoes running round shagging each other :-)
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be
no life on Earth.
An awful lot of life reproduces by asexual division. Important crops
like potatoes and bananas are produced that way - the potato flowers
and berries aren't used much.
But I take your point.
night, have ee? Taters are very romantik ...
Don't female FLOWERS have sticky out bits as well?
On 07/02/2025 01:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 17:06, SH wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:We are talking LEGO bricks dear. They offend the LBGTQ community, or
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Thats not my recollection of masonry/house building bricks.......
someone thinks they might because they 'normalise' the male
penetrating the female which is apparently insulting to arse
bandits ,lezzers and boys in frocks.
Perhaps clarification should be made to refer male to 'top' and female
to 'bottom'. Some of the LGBTQ+ community might agree?
On 06/02/2025 01:53 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:42, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think “the top of the >>>>>> brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with >>>>>> holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two
sides being put together is called mating”.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't >>>>> it? If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into
it, it is female.
heterosexual sex'
"Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.
A self-guided museum tour on “stories of queer communities,
experiences and identities” includes a display of Lego bricks
alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the idea
that heterosexuality “is the norm”.
So they were in favour of giving kids Lego?
Although I like science, I preferred the Natural History Museum, next
door.
Haven't been to either in years. Went to the British a while back, and
the V & A.
Same here. Took my young son to the Science Museum (and the "Launchpad" exhibition) back in the early 1990s and we did a family trip to the
Natural History Museum not long after (the dilodocus skeleton was still
on display).
On 07/02/2025 13:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 07/02/2025 13:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/02/2025 in message <vo4tq8$3g24n$1@dont-email.me> VirOOh Arrgh., You haint bin down tham there potato fields on a moonlit
Campestris wrote:
On 06/02/2025 14:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:Quite rare to see potatoes running round shagging each other :-)
Good, because heterosexuality is the norm, otherwise there would be
no life on Earth.
An awful lot of life reproduces by asexual division. Important crops
like potatoes and bananas are produced that way - the potato flowers
and berries aren't used much.
But I take your point.
night, have ee? Taters are very romantik ...
Don't female FLOWERS have sticky out bits as well?
Female maize flowers have pubic hair (to catch the pollen I assume).
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether
they realise it or not.
On 08/02/2025 15:21, JNugent wrote:
I hadn't realised how much 1950s kitsch homeware and furniture had
been inspired by that festival. Not that we had any of it. It was
still 1905 as far as my grandmother was concerned.
Lol. THAT modern!
I had a great aunt who strongly resembled Miss Marple.
I think the furniture with stuff covering the legs..
AS a family we couldn't afford to be Modern. Whatever was out o9f
fashion and therefore cheap secondhand, was what we had.
Nobody who lives on a low income can *afford* to entertain fancy
moralistic notions or the latest fashions.
Only when the 60s came around and we all had a bit of pocket money could
we iundulage in Carnaby street, rock music and feminism.
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
But we never had a fridge ...
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether
they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
On 10/02/2025 12:00, Jim Jackson wrote:
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether
they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
It's contraception and feminism. Or feminism and contraception.
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I
have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I
have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
On 10/02/2025 09:40 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I
have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Indeed (and no double glazing!).
But most contrary to modern received liberal opinion, that is how we
boomers (most of us at least) lived.
I was born less than six years after the end of the war. The country
still had a Labour government and *food rationing* (the western part of Germany had actually managed to abolish that a year or two earlier).
Indeed (and no double glazing!).
On 2025-02-10, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 10/02/2025 12:00, Jim Jackson wrote:
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether >>>> they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
It's contraception and feminism. Or feminism and contraception.
contraception is just the mechanism - not the cause.
And "feminism"? You mean women making decisions for themselves?
On 10/02/2025 03:13 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, >> too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles >> etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
If it happened, you are lucky to have been spared measles. I wasn't...
The episode still fills me with horror after seventy years.
I was also a victim of the fashion for admission to the childrens'
hospital. *Twice* - once for removal of tonsils and once for removal of adenoids.
Why, one might ask?
Damned if I know. But in those early days of the NHS, it was all the
rage. Male cousins of about the same age all had the same procedure.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Living in London I had every childhood disease except the important one
for later life - mumps! One time I had several weeks off school when I
had scarlet fever followed immediately by chickenpox. I don't remember
any of these being too bad - including measles - except for whooping
cough. But it wasn't the disease itself which was the problem - it was
the IM injection of penicillin into a sensitive area (the bacterium was
still sensitive to penicillins in the mid-50s. It's resistant now).
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
On 2/11/25 16:30, Jeff Layman wrote:
Living in London I had every childhood disease except the important one
for later life - mumps! One time I had several weeks off school when I
had scarlet fever followed immediately by chickenpox. I don't remember
any of these being too bad - including measles - except for whooping
cough. But it wasn't the disease itself which was the problem - it was
the IM injection of penicillin into a sensitive area (the bacterium was
still sensitive to penicillins in the mid-50s. It's resistant now).
Why did we have antibiotic injections then, but get pills now?
I have never used a duvet.
On 14:47 10 Feb 2025, JNugent said:
On 08/02/2025 03:56 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/02/2025 15:21, JNugent wrote:
[re. visit to V&A in 1976 for 25th anniversary exhibition on the
Festival of Britain:]
I hadn't realised how much 1950s kitsch homeware and furniture had
been inspired by that festival. Not that we had any of it. It was
still 1905 as far as my grandmother was concerned.
Lol. THAT modern!
I had a great aunt who strongly resembled Miss Marple.
I think the furniture with stuff covering the legs..
AS a family we couldn't afford to be Modern. Whatever was out o9f
fashion and therefore cheap secondhand, was what we had.
Nobody who lives on a low income can *afford* to entertain fancy
moralistic notions or the latest fashions.
Only when the 60s came around and we all had a bit of pocket money
could we iundulage in Carnaby street, rock music and feminism.
Ah yes... I remember it well.
But... I am a "boomer" (apparently) and as such, am frequently said to
have lived a life of absolute plenty, comfort and affluence right
through from birth to being a pensioner.
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
though I can recall it only getting BBC. But we never had a fridge or
even a vacuum cleaner (first experience of a domestic fridge at 26,
when I bought a house for 7,000 (oops!). And the idea of a car
(despite my dad being a professional driver) was sheer sci-fi.
Out of interest, do you know how the affordability of a house for 7,000 compares to the earnings required to buy a house today?
In article <XnsB283EB42A62A31F3QA2@135.181.20.170>,We joined the housing set at the end of the '60's and discovered a need
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
On 14:47 10 Feb 2025, JNugent said:
On 08/02/2025 03:56 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/02/2025 15:21, JNugent wrote:
[re. visit to V&A in 1976 for 25th anniversary exhibition on the
Festival of Britain:]
I hadn't realised how much 1950s kitsch homeware and furniture had
been inspired by that festival. Not that we had any of it. It was
still 1905 as far as my grandmother was concerned.
Lol. THAT modern!
I had a great aunt who strongly resembled Miss Marple.
I think the furniture with stuff covering the legs..
AS a family we couldn't afford to be Modern. Whatever was out o9f
fashion and therefore cheap secondhand, was what we had.
Nobody who lives on a low income can *afford* to entertain fancy
moralistic notions or the latest fashions.
Only when the 60s came around and we all had a bit of pocket money
could we iundulage in Carnaby street, rock music and feminism.
Ah yes... I remember it well.
But... I am a "boomer" (apparently) and as such, am frequently said to
have lived a life of absolute plenty, comfort and affluence right
through from birth to being a pensioner.
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
though I can recall it only getting BBC. But we never had a fridge or
even a vacuum cleaner (first experience of a domestic fridge at 26,
when I bought a house for £7,000 (oops!). And the idea of a car
(despite my dad being a professional driver) was sheer sci-fi.
Out of interest, do you know how the affordability of a house for £7,000
compares to the earnings required to buy a house today?
our first housee (1964) cost £4300 - but needed qite a bit of work on it,
13 years later I sold it for £27,000.
On 12/02/2025 01:35, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets . >>>
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
I went on holiday to Iceland in 1969. I couldn't understand why the bed
had no sheet or blanket, but what appeared to be a sort of eiderdown! I didn't like it then and my view hasn't changed. I have never used a duvet.
In article <vodrou$1d1ul$3@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher ><tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I
have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
The glass of water beside my bed had ice on it in the morning! But, I did't >get chicken-pox as a child. I caught much later from one of my small >daughters.
On 10/02/2025 03:13 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, >> too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles >> etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
If it happened, you are lucky to have been spared measles. I wasn't...
The episode still fills me with horror after seventy years.
I was also a victim of the fashion for admission to the childrens'
hospital. *Twice* - once for removal of tonsils and once for removal of >adenoids.
Why, one might ask?
Damned if I know. But in those early days of the NHS, it was all the
rage. Male cousins of about the same age all had the same procedure.
On 21:40 10 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough,
I have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets.
Horrid in wintertime.
Not forgetting window panes frozen on the inside.
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
On 21:40 10 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough,
I have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets.
Horrid in wintertime.
Not forgetting window panes frozen on the inside.
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
On 2/11/25 16:30, Jeff Layman wrote:
Living in London I had every childhood disease except the important
one for later life - mumps! One time I had several weeks off school
when I had scarlet fever followed immediately by chickenpox. I don't
remember any of these being too bad - including measles - except for
whooping cough. But it wasn't the disease itself which was the problem
- it was the IM injection of penicillin into a sensitive area (the
bacterium was still sensitive to penicillins in the mid-50s. It's
resistant now).
Why did we have antibiotic injections then, but get pills now?
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
On 21:40 10 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough,
I have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets.
Horrid in wintertime.
Not forgetting window panes frozen on the inside.
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned
upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
On 14:47 10 Feb 2025, JNugent said:
On 08/02/2025 03:56 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/02/2025 15:21, JNugent wrote:
[re. visit to V&A in 1976 for 25th anniversary exhibition on the
Festival of Britain:]
I hadn't realised how much 1950s kitsch homeware and furniture had
been inspired by that festival. Not that we had any of it. It was
still 1905 as far as my grandmother was concerned.
Lol. THAT modern!
I had a great aunt who strongly resembled Miss Marple.
I think the furniture with stuff covering the legs..
AS a family we couldn't afford to be Modern. Whatever was out o9f
fashion and therefore cheap secondhand, was what we had.
Nobody who lives on a low income can *afford* to entertain fancy
moralistic notions or the latest fashions.
Only when the 60s came around and we all had a bit of pocket money
could we iundulage in Carnaby street, rock music and feminism.
Ah yes... I remember it well.
But... I am a "boomer" (apparently) and as such, am frequently said to
have lived a life of absolute plenty, comfort and affluence right
through from birth to being a pensioner.
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
though I can recall it only getting BBC. But we never had a fridge or
even a vacuum cleaner (first experience of a domestic fridge at 26,
when I bought a house for 7,000 (oops!). And the idea of a car
(despite my dad being a professional driver) was sheer sci-fi.
Out of interest, do you know how the affordability of a house for 7,000 compares to the earnings required to buy a house today?
On 06/02/2025 13:21, Pancho wrote:
On 2/6/25 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The wokery bit claims it is 'anti LBGT' because 'it normalises
"The Science Museum guide claims that people think the top of the
brick with sticking out pins is male, the bottom of the brick with
holes to receive the pins is female, and the process of the two sides
being put together is called mating.
Why is that woke? It is standard language for tools plugs etc, isn't it?
If it looks like a dick it is male, if it has a dick fit into it, it is
female.
heterosexual sex'
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, >> too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles >> etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I
have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets
.
Horrid in wintertime.
I can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang about doing your business. We did not have a TV until the late 50’s and 60’s. That went back to the rental company when we moved to new build 3
bed semi and only got a new one about the time they started to broadcast BBC2. It’s also about the time we got the first fridge. Central heating came mid to late 60’s, I think it was the winter of 63 that spurred my parents to invest.
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to
London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her
and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they were
and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't feature within it - that was a year or two later.
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned
upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the house, >>> too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases (measles
etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
I can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang about doing your business.
We did not have a TV until the late 50’s and
60’s. That went back to the rental company when we moved to new build 3 bed semi and only got a new one about the time they started to broadcast BBC2. It’s also about the time we got the first fridge. Central heating came mid to late 60’s, I think it was the winter of 63 that spurred my parents to invest.
On 2/12/25 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
On 21:40 10 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough, >>>>> I have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood >>>>> diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food >>>>> poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets.
Horrid in wintertime.
Not forgetting window panes frozen on the inside.
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely
frowned upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I don't heat my bedroom, nowadays. It gets the heat from downstairs and
I have an electric blanket.
I don't get cold?
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely
frowned upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the
fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the main living room.
On 12/02/2025 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to
London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her
and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they
were and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't
feature within it - that was a year or two later.
Did these "continental quilts" have removable covers? (That's how they
differ from eiderdowns, which don't, and the latter don't droop down the sides of the bed, and you don't sleep next to them.)
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely
frowned upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the
fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the main living room.
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence
of need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and
blankets.
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 17:50:34 +0000
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence
of need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and
blankets.
And now we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
Joe wrote:
we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
Ironing?
Remove from washing line (or this time of year, the tumble dryer) put on
bed.
we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
The glass of water beside my bed had ice on it in the morning! But, I did't get chicken-pox as a child. I caught much later from one of my small daughters.
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 17:50:34 +0000
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence
of need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and
blankets.
And now we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to
London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her
and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they were
and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't feature within it - that was a year or two later.
One unforgettable sight in Switzerland, Austria and southern Germany is duvets being aired in fine weather by being draped over upstairs balconies.
On 10/02/2025 18:53, Jim Jackson wrote:
On 2025-02-10, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 10/02/2025 12:00, Jim Jackson wrote:
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those >>>>> who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether >>>>> they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
It's contraception and feminism. Or feminism and contraception.
contraception is just the mechanism - not the cause.
And "feminism"? You mean women making decisions for themselves?
Young women freezing their eggs, and when they are middle aged, getting
some sperm from somewhere, like a used condom.
In article <XnsB283EBBD5E4421F3QA2@135.181.20.170>, Pamela <pamela.priva te.mailbox@gmail.com> scribeth thus
On 21:40 10 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 10/02/2025 15:13, Tim Streater wrote:
On 10 Feb 2025 at 14:47:50 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house, too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough,
I have no recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood
diseases (measles etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food
poisoning episodes.
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets.
Horrid in wintertime.
Not forgetting window panes frozen on the inside.
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
Heating! You were spoiled!, we just had a bath in the tin tub in front
of the fire place then straight up to bed with the luxury of a hot water bottle!!!
On 10/02/2025 22:00, charles wrote:
The glass of water beside my bed had ice on it in the morning! But, I
did't get chicken-pox as a child. I caught much later from one of my
small daughters.
Which implies such an excess of daughters, that you must order them by
size.
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned
upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the
fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the main living room.
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned
upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence
of need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and
blankets.
And now we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
My grandmother was one of those servants in a Victorian House in Chiswick built around 1870 living in accommodation in a couple of attic rooms
The family she worked for moved out in 1937 but being good people arranged
a mortgage for her to buy it ,my Grandad hardly earn’t anything due to injuries in the trenches of WW1.
She had to rent out the rooms she once lived in and the 2nd floor below
,had gas fires fitted in place of the coal grates with the tenants paying with coin meters, she kept coal herself as she preferred a real fire. She finally paid off the mortgage in 1971 having worked as a domestic beyond normal retirement age My parents rented the 2nd floor after they wed and I spent the first 7 years of my life there . It was always quite cold and Hot water both in our bit and grans was from Gas fired Ascot Geysers.
Ironically when she had been a servant there was a coal fired boiler with piped hot water to all floors but that fell into disuse after she bought
it. In fact she never had enough money to really modernise it and the Luftwaffe removing the roof and part of the walls didn’t help.
No power sockets were installed till 1958.
I don’t think a char lady could hope to buy a house in Chiswick now.
Mother and I moved out in 1962 after Cancer got Dad.
We moved to N Devon to stay on a relatives Farm, That was November 1962
,we soon missed those gas fires in an old stone farmhouse with the only
heat from a 90 year old range and the only electric from a 2kW Lister generator whose output you rationed around appliances .Ie you could have lights or a kettle but not lights and a kettle.
I’ve appreciated the ease which the “Main”s can deliver power which our forebears could only dream about ever since.
GH
On 11/02/2025 12:17, Max Demian wrote:
On 10/02/2025 18:53, Jim Jackson wrote:
On 2025-02-10, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 10/02/2025 12:00, Jim Jackson wrote:
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those >>>>>> who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population,
whether
they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan. >>>>>
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
It's contraception and feminism. Or feminism and contraception.
contraception is just the mechanism - not the cause.
And "feminism"? You mean women making decisions for themselves?
Young women freezing their eggs, and when they are middle aged,Thanks for the entertainment.
getting some sperm from somewhere, like a used condom.
On 13/02/2025 12:09 AM, Marland wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
My grandmother was one of those servants in a Victorian House in Chiswick
built around 1870 living in accommodation in a couple of attic rooms
The family she worked for moved out in 1937 but being good people arranged >> a mortgage for her to buy it ,my Grandad hardly earn’t anything due to
injuries in the trenches of WW1.
She had to rent out the rooms she once lived in and the 2nd floor below
,had gas fires fitted in place of the coal grates with the tenants paying
with coin meters, she kept coal herself as she preferred a real fire. She >> finally paid off the mortgage in 1971 having worked as a domestic beyond
normal retirement age My parents rented the 2nd floor after they wed and I >> spent the first 7 years of my life there . It was always quite cold and Hot >> water both in our bit and grans was from Gas fired Ascot Geysers.
Ironically when she had been a servant there was a coal fired boiler with
piped hot water to all floors but that fell into disuse after she bought
it. In fact she never had enough money to really modernise it and the
Luftwaffe removing the roof and part of the walls didn’t help.
No power sockets were installed till 1958.
I don’t think a char lady could hope to buy a house in Chiswick now.
Mother and I moved out in 1962 after Cancer got Dad.
We moved to N Devon to stay on a relatives Farm, That was November 1962
,we soon missed those gas fires in an old stone farmhouse with the only
heat from a 90 year old range and the only electric from a 2kW Lister
generator whose output you rationed around appliances .Ie you could have
lights or a kettle but not lights and a kettle.
I’ve appreciated the ease which the “Main”s can deliver power which our
forebears could only dream about ever since.
Wow...
The months just after November 1962 must have been particularly trying.
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely
frowned upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the
main living room.
Not true, our last house was built in 1957 and had fireplaces in both downstairs reception rooms and both bedrooms above them. Having said that
one of our technicians lived in a terraced house where the chimney went
up the middle of the house and he preferred to use the coal fire the
heated brickwork effectively heated the bedrooms above.
Joe wrote:
we have fitted bottom sheets, the ironing of which provides a
useful introduction to non-Euclidean geometry.
Ironing?
Remove from washing line (or this time of year, the tumble dryer) put on
bed.
On 12/02/2025 05:38 PM, Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like >>>> onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to
London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her
and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they
were and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't
feature within it - that was a year or two later.
Did these "continental quilts" have removable covers? (That's how they
differ from eiderdowns, which don't, and the latter don't droop down the
sides of the bed, and you don't sleep next to them.)
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence of
need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and blankets.
On 12 Feb 2025 at 08:59:47 GMT, "Jeff Layman" <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
On 12/02/2025 01:35, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
I went on holiday to Iceland in 1969. I couldn't understand why the bed
had no sheet or blanket, but what appeared to be a sort of eiderdown! I
didn't like it then and my view hasn't changed. I have never used a
duvet.
Duvets are fine until you start to get old, because they require your
body to be able to adjust its heat output so you don't overheat in bed.
Later in life this becomes harder, so we use a thin duvet, fine for
summer but which gets supplemented with a proper eiderdown in winter.
Making a bed with a duvet is nice and simple compared to having a sheet, blankets, and perhaps also an eiderdown.
On 12/02/2025 17:50, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 05:38 PM, Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit like >>>>> onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to
London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her
and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they
were and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't
feature within it - that was a year or two later.
Did these "continental quilts" have removable covers? (That's how they
differ from eiderdowns, which don't, and the latter don't droop down the >>> sides of the bed, and you don't sleep next to them.)
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence of
need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and blankets.
I still do, on the "layers" principle. It's a lot easier to get the temperature comfortable by removing/adding layers. For me, when I've had
to use them in hotels or staying with friends, beds using duvets come in
two temperatures - too hot or too cold...
In the end it's just a matter of what you prefer, I guess.
On 12/02/2025 04:30 PM, Tricky Dicky wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
OK, I can't really remember not having a TV (I'll give 'em that),
Oh I can. I can also remember periods of there being no food in the
house,
too.
But we never had a fridge ...
Neither did we, which didn't do much for food hygiene. Oddly enough,
I have no
recollection of ever having any of the so-called childhood diseases
(measles
etc)- none of them, but I remember a number of food poisoning episodes.
I have no recollection of *not* having every single disease going,
including food poisoning.
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No
duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
I can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang
about doing your business.
That was more common than you might think.
On 12/02/2025 04:30 PM, Tricky Dicky wrote:
I can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang
about doing your business.
That was more common than you might think. There were hundreds of
thousands (if not millions) of houses which answered the description of
not having indoor plumbing of any sort (including bathrooms with indoor toilets) other than a single cold tap in the "back kitchen" or scullery.
One thing that I
still remember was having left a London primary school
with its daily issue of milk and radiators and moving to a village two room >school where the rooms were heated FSVO by cast iron coal burning stoves
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 04:30 PM, Tricky Dicky wrote:
Strange as it seems now many people who grew up with the Loo out the back felt that was the best place for them and having one inside was unhygienic, of course many were once only a bucket rather than a flush toilet soI can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang >>> about doing your business.
That was more common than you might think. There were hundreds of
thousands (if not millions) of houses which answered the description of
not having indoor plumbing of any sort (including bathrooms with indoor
toilets) other than a single cold tap in the "back kitchen" or scullery.
keeping a smelly bucket of waste out of the house was probably the better option . I was surprised to find that when I moved to Hampshire in the
early 1970’s to see an advert by Winchester Council a City that is generally considered to be quite affluent for a night soil collector.
They still had some properties where the toilets were still the bucket type and the waste was collected every morning.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 04:30 PM, Tricky Dicky wrote:
Strange as it seems now many people who grew up with the Loo out the back >felt that was the best place for them and having one inside was unhygienic, >of course many were once only a bucket rather than a flush toilet so
I can go one better how about an outside loo? You certainly did not hang >>> about doing your business.
That was more common than you might think. There were hundreds of
thousands (if not millions) of houses which answered the description of
not having indoor plumbing of any sort (including bathrooms with indoor
toilets) other than a single cold tap in the "back kitchen" or scullery.
keeping a smelly bucket of waste out of the house was probably the better >option . I was surprised to find that when I moved to Hampshire in the
early 1970’s to see an advert by Winchester Council a City that is >generally considered to be quite affluent for a night soil collector.
They still had some properties where the toilets were still the bucket type >and the waste was collected every morning.
GH
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
My grandmother was one of those servants in a Victorian House in Chiswick >built around 1870 living in accommodation in a couple of attic rooms
The family she worked for moved out in 1937 but being good people arranged
a mortgage for her to buy it ,my Grandad hardly earn’t anything due to >injuries in the trenches of WW1.
She had to rent out the rooms she once lived in and the 2nd floor below
,had gas fires fitted in place of the coal grates with the tenants paying >with coin meters, she kept coal herself as she preferred a real fire. She >finally paid off the mortgage in 1971 having worked as a domestic beyond >normal retirement age My parents rented the 2nd floor after they wed and I >spent the first 7 years of my life there . It was always quite cold and Hot >water both in our bit and grans was from Gas fired Ascot Geysers.
Ironically when she had been a servant there was a coal fired boiler with >piped hot water to all floors but that fell into disuse after she bought
it. In fact she never had enough money to really modernise it and the >Luftwaffe removing the roof and part of the walls didn’t help.
No power sockets were installed till 1958.
I don’t think a char lady could hope to buy a house in Chiswick now.
Mother and I moved out in 1962 after Cancer got Dad.
We moved to N Devon to stay on a relatives Farm, That was November 1962
,we soon missed those gas fires in an old stone farmhouse with the only
heat from a 90 year old range and the only electric from a 2kW Lister >generator whose output you rationed around appliances .Ie you could have >lights or a kettle but not lights and a kettle.
I’ve appreciated the ease which the “Main”s can deliver power which our >forebears could only dream about ever since.
GH
On 13/02/2025 08:42, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 12/02/2025 17:50, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 05:38 PM, Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 12/02/2025 01:35 AM, Pancho wrote:
On 2/10/25 21:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
No central heating, no fridge, no hot water most of the time. No >>>>>>> duvets .
Horrid in wintertime.
Duvets started about 1970? I think we got them for Habitat. A bit
like
onesies, you get them and wonder why you didn't have them before.
A female acquaintance worked in Selfridges in the 1970s. On a trip to >>>>> London circa 1975, I was having a drink in a Duke Street pub with her >>>>> and some of her colleagues when one of them mentioned "continental
quilts", newly in stock at the store. Intrigued, I asked what they
were and had the full ten minute explanation. The term "duvet" didn't >>>>> feature within it - that was a year or two later.
Did these "continental quilts" have removable covers? (That's how they >>>> differ from eiderdowns, which don't, and the latter don't droop down
the
sides of the bed, and you don't sleep next to them.)
Oh yes, that's the whole point of them. People point to the absence of
need for top sheets, but the cover is the sheet!
When my wife arrived on the scene, she was the one who initiated the
swap to CQs/duvets. Before that, I'd been using top sheets and blankets.
I still do, on the "layers" principle. It's a lot easier to get the
temperature comfortable by removing/adding layers. For me, when I've
had to use them in hotels or staying with friends, beds using duvets
come in two temperatures - too hot or too cold...
In the end it's just a matter of what you prefer, I guess.
Making a bed with a fitted bottom sheet and a duvet is so much easier
than with sheets and blankets, especially if not fitted. You're hardly "making" it at all, just putting the duvet straight.
Duvets are often in 9 and 4.5 tog, and can be clipped together to make
13.5 tog. I prefer to put the thin and thick duvets in separate covers
so I can adjust the insulation at will.
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the
fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the main
living room.
Not true, our last house was built in 1957 and had fireplaces in both downstairs reception rooms and both bedrooms above them. Having said that
one of our technicians lived in a terraced house where the chimney went up the middle of the house and he preferred to use the coal fire the heated brickwork effectively heated the bedrooms above.
In article <m14ri0FhvdgU1@mid.individual.net>, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> scribeth thus
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
My grandmother was one of those servants in a Victorian House in Chiswick
built around 1870 living in accommodation in a couple of attic rooms
The family she worked for moved out in 1937 but being good people arranged >> a mortgage for her to buy it ,my Grandad hardly earn’t anything due to
injuries in the trenches of WW1.
She had to rent out the rooms she once lived in and the 2nd floor below
,had gas fires fitted in place of the coal grates with the tenants paying
with coin meters, she kept coal herself as she preferred a real fire. She >> finally paid off the mortgage in 1971 having worked as a domestic beyond
normal retirement age My parents rented the 2nd floor after they wed and I >> spent the first 7 years of my life there . It was always quite cold and Hot >> water both in our bit and grans was from Gas fired Ascot Geysers.
Ironically when she had been a servant there was a coal fired boiler with
piped hot water to all floors but that fell into disuse after she bought
it. In fact she never had enough money to really modernise it and the
Luftwaffe removing the roof and part of the walls didn’t help.
No power sockets were installed till 1958.
I don’t think a char lady could hope to buy a house in Chiswick now.
Mother and I moved out in 1962 after Cancer got Dad.
We moved to N Devon to stay on a relatives Farm, That was November 1962
,we soon missed those gas fires in an old stone farmhouse with the only
heat from a 90 year old range and the only electric from a 2kW Lister
generator whose output you rationed around appliances .Ie you could have
lights or a kettle but not lights and a kettle.
I’ve appreciated the ease which the “Main”s can deliver power which our
forebears could only dream about ever since.
GH
Amazing story that Marland:)..
JOOI who paid for war damage repairs was it the house owner or the
government at the time anyone know?..
In article <voj7s4$2hrs9$1@dont-email.me>, Tricky Dicky <tricky.dicky@sky.com> wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely
frowned upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the
fire was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I
only remember measles when I was five.
Houses built in the fifties and sixties only had a fireplace in the
main living room.
Not true, our last house was built in 1957 and had fireplaces in both
downstairs reception rooms and both bedrooms above them. Having said that
one of our technicians lived in a terraced house where the chimney went
up the middle of the house and he preferred to use the coal fire the
heated brickwork effectively heated the bedrooms above.
+1 our bedroom was heated by the chimney of the fire in the sitting room below.
tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
In article <m14ri0FhvdgU1@mid.individual.net>, Marland
<gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> scribeth thus
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2025 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2025 11:10 PM, Pamela wrote:
And a measly single bar fire in the bedroom. Brrr!
An electric fire in a bedroom?
Luxury...
There were coal fire grates in ours. And using them was severely frowned >>>>> upon by those responsible for paying for coal.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms.
All right if you had a servant to lay the fire .
My grandmother was one of those servants in a Victorian House in Chiswick >>> built around 1870 living in accommodation in a couple of attic rooms
The family she worked for moved out in 1937 but being good people arranged >>> a mortgage for her to buy it ,my Grandad hardly earn’t anything due to >>> injuries in the trenches of WW1.
She had to rent out the rooms she once lived in and the 2nd floor below >>> ,had gas fires fitted in place of the coal grates with the tenants paying >>> with coin meters, she kept coal herself as she preferred a real fire. She >>> finally paid off the mortgage in 1971 having worked as a domestic beyond >>> normal retirement age My parents rented the 2nd floor after they wed and I >>> spent the first 7 years of my life there . It was always quite cold and Hot >>> water both in our bit and grans was from Gas fired Ascot Geysers.
Ironically when she had been a servant there was a coal fired boiler with >>> piped hot water to all floors but that fell into disuse after she bought >>> it. In fact she never had enough money to really modernise it and the
Luftwaffe removing the roof and part of the walls didn’t help.
No power sockets were installed till 1958.
I don’t think a char lady could hope to buy a house in Chiswick now.
Mother and I moved out in 1962 after Cancer got Dad.
We moved to N Devon to stay on a relatives Farm, That was November 1962 >>> ,we soon missed those gas fires in an old stone farmhouse with the only
heat from a 90 year old range and the only electric from a 2kW Lister
generator whose output you rationed around appliances .Ie you could have >>> lights or a kettle but not lights and a kettle.
I’ve appreciated the ease which the “Main”s can deliver power which our
forebears could only dream about ever since.
GH
Amazing story that Marland:)..
JOOI who paid for war damage repairs was it the house owner or the
government at the time anyone know?..
AFAIK the government paid for repairs to make homes habitable if possible
but by the necessity
of wartime limits on materials they could be quite basic. The once fairly ornate plaster ceilings remained cracked for years. I don’t know what happened if the house had to demolished and rebuilt,
Gran was lucky in away as her house was deemed repairable as was the adjoining semi but beyond that the houses were destroyed completely.
You can see the change between original and reconstruction by the plainer style of the latter on streetview
<https://maps.app.goo.gl/uufowSUF4z5EZCCf9>
and some properties were replaced by council flats. Some people were still in prefabs on the parkland around the railway until the 1960’s.
Oh and they came and took all the railings aways , you can still see where they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
Making a bed with a fitted bottom sheet and a duvet is so much easier than with sheets and blankets, especially if not fitted. You're hardly "making"
it at all, just putting the duvet straight.
I never understood why so many old houses had grates in the bedrooms. All right if you had a servant to lay the fire I suppose. In theory the fire
was lit if you were ill; but I was never ill enough for that - I only remember measles when I was five.
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Making a bed with a fitted bottom sheet and a duvet is so much easier than >> with sheets and blankets, especially if not fitted. You're hardly "making" >> it at all, just putting the duvet straight.Putting a top sheet on is much easier than putting on a duvet cover. A
trick, I saw used in an hotel, which I now use is use a top sheet with a duvet, saves changing the duvet cover as often.
tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
JOOI who paid for war damage repairs was it the house owner or the
government at the time anyone know?..
AFAIK the government paid for repairs to make homes habitable if possible
but by the necessity
of wartime limits on materials they could be quite basic. The once fairly ornate plaster ceilings remained cracked for years. I don’t know what happened if the house had to demolished and rebuilt,
Gran was lucky in away as her house was deemed repairable as was the adjoining semi but beyond that the houses were destroyed completely.
You can see the change between original and reconstruction by the plainer style of the latter on streetview
<https://maps.app.goo.gl/uufowSUF4z5EZCCf9>
and some properties were replaced by council flats. Some people were still in prefabs on the parkland around the railway until the 1960’s.
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Making a bed with a fitted bottom sheet and a duvet is so much easier than >> with sheets and blankets, especially if not fitted. You're hardly "making" >> it at all, just putting the duvet straight.Putting a top sheet on is much easier than putting on a duvet cover. A
trick, I saw used in an hotel, which I now use is use a top sheet with a duvet, saves changing the duvet cover as often.
On 13/02/2025 18:56, Marland wrote:
tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
JOOI who paid for war damage repairs was it the house owner or the
government at the time anyone know?..
AFAIK the government paid for repairs to make homes habitable if possible
but by the necessity
of wartime limits on materials they could be quite basic. The once fairly
ornate plaster ceilings remained cracked for years. I dont know what
happened if the house had to demolished and rebuilt,
Gran was lucky in away as her house was deemed repairable as was the
adjoining semi but beyond that the houses were destroyed completely.
You can see the change between original and reconstruction by the plainer
style of the latter on streetview
<https://maps.app.goo.gl/uufowSUF4z5EZCCf9>
and some properties were replaced by council flats. Some people were still >> in prefabs on the parkland around the railway until the 1960s.
I remember the prefabs.
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war effort".
you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
Sounds a bit like one of the schools I went to (late 60s) [...] hadWe had those in the classrooms in outbuildings during '70s, they glowed
a cast iron coal/coke (I forget) stove in a wire mesh cage to stop
pupils getting burnt.
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:47:51 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 18:56, Marland wrote:
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war effort". >>> you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
Still clearly visible in many places. What was needed for the war
effort was steel, with its low carbon content, with typically less
than say 0.5% carbon. Much of what was collected was cast iron, with
say 3-4% carbon. But cast iron has a lower melting point than steel
(say 1200°C, compared with 1400-1500°C for steel). As a result, small
local foundries found it easier and cheaper to make items with cast
iron, such as cooking pots, cooking stoves and cast iron railings,
rather than with steel.
But the men who went around collecting the stuff 'for the war effort',
either weren't told not to collect cast iron, or weren't told how to distinguish it from steel, so collected both. Although cast iron can
be converted to steel, it was simpler just to put it to one side until
the supply of scrap steel dried up.
On 14/02/2025 14:30, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:47:51 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 18:56, Marland wrote:
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war effort". >>>> you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
Still clearly visible in many places. What was needed for the war
effort was steel, with its low carbon content, with typically less
than say 0.5% carbon. Much of what was collected was cast iron, with
say 3-4% carbon. But cast iron has a lower melting point than steel
(say 1200C, compared with 1400-1500C for steel). As a result, small
local foundries found it easier and cheaper to make items with cast
iron, such as cooking pots, cooking stoves and cast iron railings,
rather than with steel.
But the men who went around collecting the stuff 'for the war effort',
either weren't told not to collect cast iron, or weren't told how to
distinguish it from steel, so collected both. Although cast iron can
be converted to steel, it was simpler just to put it to one side until
the supply of scrap steel dried up.
How about ornamental fences with curly bits known as "wrought iron"? Is
that OK, or is it really some kind of steel?
And heterosexuality goes back a bit further than that. I think those
who disparage it are working to reduce the Western population, whether
they realise it or not.
Don't think we need that - where Japan leads we follow, and
I don't think there's much "disparaging of heterosexuality" in Japan.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/japan-population/
Decline in Population growth in many affluent countries has very
little to do with any marginal affects attitudes to sexuality have.
The clue's in the "affluent".
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:47:51 +0000, Max Demian
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war effort". >>> you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
But the men who went around collecting the stuff 'for the war effort',
either weren't told not to collect cast iron, or weren't told how to distinguish it from steel, so collected both. Although cast iron can
be converted to steel, it was simpler just to put it to one side until
the supply of scrap steel dried up.
There was also a political angle, to involve the whole country and
make everyone feel part of the war effort and that they were 'doing
their bit'.
On 14/02/2025 14:30, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:47:51 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 18:56, Marland wrote:
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war
effort".
you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
Still clearly visible in many places. What was needed for the war
effort was steel, with its low carbon content, with typically less
than say 0.5% carbon. Much of what was collected was cast iron, with
say 3-4% carbon. But cast iron has a lower melting point than steel
(say 1200°C, compared with 1400-1500°C for steel). As a result, small
local foundries found it easier and cheaper to make items with cast
iron, such as cooking pots, cooking stoves and cast iron railings,
rather than with steel.
But the men who went around collecting the stuff 'for the war effort',
either weren't told not to collect cast iron, or weren't told how to
distinguish it from steel, so collected both. Although cast iron can
be converted to steel, it was simpler just to put it to one side until
the supply of scrap steel dried up.
How about ornamental fences with curly bits known as "wrought iron"? Is
that OK, or is it really some kind of steel?
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 18:04:53 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:30, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:47:51 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 18:56, Marland wrote:
Oh and they came and took all the railings away...
...and threw them away as the metal wasn't suitable for the "war effort". >>>>> you can still see where
they got cut off,a scenario repeated all over the country.
I remember the disfigurements.
Still clearly visible in many places. What was needed for the war
effort was steel, with its low carbon content, with typically less
than say 0.5% carbon. Much of what was collected was cast iron, with
say 3-4% carbon. But cast iron has a lower melting point than steel
(say 1200°C, compared with 1400-1500°C for steel). As a result, small
local foundries found it easier and cheaper to make items with cast
iron, such as cooking pots, cooking stoves and cast iron railings,
rather than with steel.
But the men who went around collecting the stuff 'for the war effort',
either weren't told not to collect cast iron, or weren't told how to
distinguish it from steel, so collected both. Although cast iron can
be converted to steel, it was simpler just to put it to one side until
the supply of scrap steel dried up.
How about ornamental fences with curly bits known as "wrought iron"? Is
that OK, or is it really some kind of steel?
The latter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrought_iron
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:46:53 |
| Calls: | 10,387 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,795 |