― Tim (Tim), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:57 (nineteen years ago) link
I would be there, indeedy. But we must be *very* careful about which pub we choose.
Kate - I'd much rather my dad were still here (albeit not suffering) than have the money he left me. Hope that eases your breakup.
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:58 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Friday, 11 June 2004 10:59 (nineteen years ago) link
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:06 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:09 (nineteen years ago) link
― chris (chris), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:11 (nineteen years ago) link
Although I guess the term "bridge and tunnel" is quite offensive in this context, people were a little quick to jump at Kate's throat just for explaining the term. It really does assume that everyone who comes from out of town is a trouble-maker, when in fact I'm sure there's just as much trouble caused by people in their own towns. People are generally wankers by default. Also, it's also quite offensive that city folk will act so snooty in a "oh, please don't spoil our lovely town with your non-ironic haircuts and your shocking lacks of knowledge about microhouse" kind of way, but that's another story.Trendier London clubs are nothing like my initial post. The rant was indeed about small-town clubbing where they have to appeal to the lowest common denominator - students, office workers, townies, breezer birds etc. I walk past the queue for the Corn Exchange in Hitchin town centre and am amazed that these people would actually want to go in when there's plenty of other places they could go. Oh well, I guess it's a good thing because it keeps this kind of demographic out of the decent pubs.
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:12 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:13 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:15 (nineteen years ago) link
― HAMBURGER NEURON GROUP (ex machina), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:16 (nineteen years ago) link
You know, it's just as offensive to make sweeping generalisations about city folk as it is to make sweeping generalisations about suburban folk.
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:20 (nineteen years ago) link
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:21 (nineteen years ago) link
but only if they are asymmetric too
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:23 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:23 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:26 (nineteen years ago) link
what is wrong with ironic haircuts?
there is a strange classism being exhibited by many people, which seems to suggest that 'ordinary people' (you mean, working class people right?) don't/shouldn't do these things. i don't understand.
some of the attitudes and opinions expressed seem very similar to those i came to london to escape.
this isnt the premise of dlatins post, apologies dl
― bridge, tunnel and lido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:42 (nineteen years ago) link
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:43 (nineteen years ago) link
xpost: gareth, not sure if i understand the analogy between fakeness/ponceyness and classism as regards this thread...
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:43 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:43 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:45 (nineteen years ago) link
ironic haircuts i can take or leave
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:46 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 11:47 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:02 (nineteen years ago) link
its difficult to articulate, and is only hinted at in this thread really
i think its the anti ironic-hair thing, a dislike of 'ponceyness', see the many comments about 'hipster cunts' that pepper the board. yes, of course, i am aware that that is a convenient straw man for people but...
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:03 (nineteen years ago) link
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:07 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:08 (nineteen years ago) link
― don (don), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:10 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:10 (nineteen years ago) link
― Enrique (Enrique), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:11 (nineteen years ago) link
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:11 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:12 (nineteen years ago) link
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:15 (nineteen years ago) link
― chris (chris), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:15 (nineteen years ago) link
FWIW I am a slightly bemulleted lower middle class suburbanite so please take the above comment with heaps of salt.
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:16 (nineteen years ago) link
The behaviour in question is *not* "living in the suburbs" which is the mistaken connotation due to the derivation of the term. The behaviour in question is common or gardern wankerhood which all of you would recognise as wankerhood.
― Possibly Kate Again (kate), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:17 (nineteen years ago) link
Enrique - maybe the 'suburbs' will end up connoting working class when there is *no more* affordable housing in central London. There's something heartwarming that the areas my parents grew up in are now considered desirable; less heart-warming that they almost definitely couldn't afford to live in them anymore (but so is life).
― stevie (stevie), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:18 (nineteen years ago) link
i think this is the implication i'm referring to. that being poncey is seen as a bad thing? why is it?
this reminds me of being back in yorkshire
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:19 (nineteen years ago) link
Bollocks -- anyway, how do you make out that inner-city residents are better-behaved than the B&T lot? I don't see it.
My last post was a bit confused, but basically I was refuting the idea that by calling out the idea of the B&T as snobbish I was not being inversely-snobbish towards all you excitingly-coiffed Zone 1 and 2ers.
― Enrique (Enrique), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:20 (nineteen years ago) link
― charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 11 June 2004 12:24 (nineteen years ago) link