Room 101 - what single aspect of modern life should be consigned to oblivion?

[amateur51]

Or 'bright & cheerful', which is the 50's useage that people who complain about homosexuals hijacking the word are harking back to. A housewife might be advised, in a woman's magazine of the time, to hang some 'gay gingham curtains' to brighten up the kitchen.

Presumably 'batchelor gay' referred to the 'dissipation' meaning.

Odd isn't it how no-one ever seeks to reclaim the 'original' meanings of queer, nancy, faggot, etc. [...]

[french frank]

Odd isn't it how no-one ever seeks to reclaim the 'original' meanings of queer, nancy, faggot, etc.

Well, down our way the primary meaning of 'faggot' is still a sort of meatball.

[amateur51]

Well, down our way the primary meaning of 'faggot' is still a sort of meatball.

Generally speaking that meaning is one of the two usual meanings french frank, the other being a bundle of twigs that was used to raise a fire on which to burn witches and 'homosexual' men.

Nowadays it has an additional meaning, of course,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2101387/Ravel-Morrison-charged-homophobic-Twitter-slur.html

[Lateralthinking1]

teamsaint - Thank you ever so much. Absolutely horrific. Basically work that was undertaken without the proper Notice and commitments. Council said "take it up with them". They said "see you in court". Obviously they are "in" property. So then pay for a surveyor who says "it should be alright I think". There's a shared drain that they altered without consulting seven others, a soakaway that is questionable, earth removal like you wouldn't believe up to the boundary, refusal to put in a retaining wall with the Council saying it "probably" isn't needed, fences that are illegal and too high, subsequently replaced. And then to find out after months of evasion that the landscaping plans have never even been submitted and are allegedly in Canada. Mechanical diggers already in full flow. And a gas leak near to the "explosive" reading. Workmen outside for six hours repairing the damage.

The plans are then submitted three years late and retrospectively approved, ongoing issues not fully addressed, a Stage 1 complaints procedure, an FOI request, both half dealt with, and then a letter seeking clarity not acknowledged for two and a half months. Council says all must be complete by mid-Jan. A load of muck and mess left since Oct for no apparent reason. This morning it all kicks off again, way past the deadline, with a "don't park here" notice "we're doing building again", back onto the Ombudsman and the Council. There have been two visits from the Council today. It's paving. They regret how it is being done but of course believe that it is all more or less in order. They "hope" to reply to the remaining points soon. Oh and now the work won't commence until later, there will be a lot of noise, they can't give a completion date and yet somehow it is authorised - Lat.

[decantor]

Neighbours who create a building site on the boundary for a year and don't comply with the requirements set by the Council.

Councils who set requirements, don't enforce them, and when asked to do so repeatedly, don't communicate.

Well, if you are genuinely suffering loss of amenity or material damage, why not try an action in the Small Claims' Court against the Council for negligence or some such? (Then again, my solicitor seems to charge £75 for picking up the phone when it rings.)

[Lateralthinking1]

Well, if you are genuinely suffering loss of amenity or material damage, why not try an action in the Small Claims' Court against the Council for negligence or some such? (Then again, my solicitor seems to charge £75 for picking up the phone when it rings.)

Thanks decantor. Not ruled out. I did speak to a lawyer but they are not my thing. Wanted £300 for an initial chat. Very off. Thing is - it is next to my parents' property. I am next door to them. They are semis. If permanent damage has ultimately been caused, it affects the lot. Theirs and mine. We have worked closely together but Dad goes in for a scan on Thur, the day the new work is now going to start. It really isn't what he needs right now. In the meantime, I am doing what I can in all of our interests - Lat.

[teamsaint]

teamsaint - Thank you ever so much. Absolutely horrific. Basically work that was undertaken without the proper Notice and commitments. Council said "take it up with them". They said "see you in court". Obviosuly they are "in" property. So then pay for a surveyor who says "it should be alright I think". There's a shared drain that they altered without consulting seven others, a soakaway that is questionable, earth removal like you wouldn't believe up to the boundary, refusal to put in a retaining wall with the Council saying it "probably" isn't needed, fences that are illegal and too high, subsequently replaced. And then to find out after months of evasion that the landscaping plans have never even been submitted and are allegedly in Canada. Mechanical diggers already in full flow. And a gas leak near to the "explosive" reading. Workmen outside for six hours repairing the damage.

The plans are then submitted three years late and retrospectively approved, ongoing issues not fully addressed, a Stage 1 complaints procedure, an FOI request, both half dealt with, and then a letter seeking clarity not acknowledged for two and a half months. Council says all must be complete by mid-Jan. A load of muck and mess left since Oct for no apparent reason. This morning it all kicks off again, way past the deadline, with a "don't park here" notice "we're doing building again", back onto the Ombudsman and the Council. There have been two visits from the Council today. They regret how it is being done but of course believe that it is all more or less in order. They hope to reply to the remaining points soon. Oh and now the work won't commence until later, there will be a lot of noise, they can't give a completion date and yet somehow it is authorised - Lat.

i really don't know how to reply. It must be unbearable.
I do know somebody who is involved in getting substantial plans passed, (in an absolutely above board and highly responsible way, I might add).I will ask if he has any hints on ways to proceed, or to exert pressure.

[Lateralthinking1]

i really don't know how to reply. It must be unbearable.
I do know somebody who is involved in getting substantial plans passed, (in an absolutely above board and highly responsible way, I might add).I will ask if he has any hints on ways to proceed, or to exert pressure.

That is very kind teamsaint. Thank you. Don't go beyond what you wish to do. Some of it is done now. It has been May to February so far. We were sending Christmas cards before. Not any more. My parents would probably still be reasonably friendly to people if they were about to set light to their house but even they have drawn a line. Very unusually, we don't talk. How could you? At the moment my 81 year old mother spent the afternoon on buses to escape - intimidated out of her home essentially - I did read the riot act. Still, much is in the past. These people are in their early seventies and well spoken. Extraordinary, dismal and actually very scary. - Lat.

[aeolium]

How about a campaign to promote 'jocund'? That's a rather nice Shakespearian word which fits quite a few situations!

Ff, 'jocund' is a good word, and I'd like to see it used more. And what about that Old English word 'blithe'?

(Even further OT) My grandfather, who grew up in West Bromwich, used to use the Old English word 'gledes' for embers in a fire (quite a few of those old words were still in common use in certain areas well into the C20).

[jayne lee wilson]

But why wouldn't they want to read it? Because of course they - and some of their class - have hidden and not-so-hidden prejudices against gay people. Why else do they giggle and jeer? I'm sure you don't feel that way Aeolium, but you see the problem? It should be perfectly possible to use "gay" for other things. As Charlton Heston nearly said, it's not words that kill people, it's people that kill people, and the recent use of "gay" in the playground or in the mouths of Chris Moyles etc. etc. is a terrible develoment - effectively letting prejudice speak out, disguised by a pretence of humour or being streetwise.

Homophobic bullying - more an emotional mockery and exclusion than actual beating, but it was close - led directly to me being friendless and jobless for years after school, I just wanted to keep away from people. So this newer useage of "gay" is not trivial.
Must say I enjoyed reclaiming "queer" though! That one was often hurled at me like a stone.

And of course the change in meaning of 'gay'. Does any teacher now dare to stand up in front of a class of teenagers and read Yeats' poem Lapis Lazuli, with its lines, "All things fall and are built again,/And those that build them again are gay."?

[aeolium]

But why wouldn't they want to read it? Because of course they - and some of their class - have hidden and not-so-hidden prejudices against gay people.

That may well be true in some cases - I was only thinking of a much simpler explanation that the current principal meaning of the word has largely obscured its earlier meanings for a new generation.

Clearly I have unintentionally touched some raw nerves by bringing this up, for which I apologise, and I shall now withdraw from this thread.

[amateur51]

But why wouldn't they want to read it? Because of course they - and some of their class - have hidden and not-so-hidden prejudices against gay people. Why else do they giggle and jeer? I'm sure you don't feel that way Aeolium, but you see the problem? It should be perfectly possible to use "gay" for other things. As Charlton Heston nearly said, it's not words that kill people, it's people that kill people, and the recent use of "gay" in the playground or in the mouths of Chris Moyles etc. etc. is a terrible develoment - effectively letting prejudice speak out, disguised by a pretence of humour or being streetwise.

Homophobic bullying - more an emotional mockery and exclusion than actual beating, but it was close - led directly to me being friendless and jobless for years after school, I just wanted to keep away from people. So this newer useage of "gay" is not trivial.
Must say I enjoyed reclaiming "queer" though! That one was often hurled at me like a stone.

Sorry to hear about your experiences of homophobic bullying, jlw. The reclamation of 'queer' was rather fun, I agree .

Sadly homophobic attitudes do sometimes lead to physical expression which can lead to injury and death. I attach this account from wiki of the death of Michael Causer from Liverpool but I warn readers that the account clearly links the use of homophobic language with his murder and may well upset them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Michael_Causer

Clearly, the link betweeen such attitudes, language and murderous actions means that the attitudes and the language are not trivial and need to be challenged by us all.

[Ferretfancy]

That may well be true in some cases - I was only thinking of a much simpler explanation that the current principal meaning of the word has largely obscured its earlier meanings for a new generation.

Clearly I have unintentionally touched some raw nerves by bringing this up, for which I apologise, and I shall now withdraw from this thread.

aeolium,

You spoke fairly, and certainly did not touch a raw nerve in me. Incidentally, Terry-Thomas once said that when her first visited America, his hosts were nonplussed when he said how much he enjoyed a fag!

[ahinton]

Sorry to hear about your experiences of homophobic bullying, jlw.

So am I. In fact, I find that kind of thing so incredibly inhuman that I wonder how people actually manage to do it at all - but I do realise that some of them do.

[Pabmusic]

Talking head: Today, Pabmusic complained that links to many news items and introductions to TV programmes often contain too much substantive information, making the principal item merely repetitious. Our reporter Jeremy Splod is live at Pabmusic’s address.

Jeremy Splod: Yes, today Pabmusic complained that links to many news items and introductions to TV programmes often contain too much substantive information, making the principal item merely repetitious. Pabmusic, what is your view?

Pabmusic: I think the links to many news items and introductions to TV programmes often contain too much substantive information.

Splod: Would you say that makes the principal item merely repetitious?

Pabmusic: Yes.

Splod: Well, that’s Pabmusic complaining that the links to many news items and introductions to TV programmes often contain too much substantive information, making the principal item merely repetitious. So it's back to the studio…

[Rolling bar saying “Pabmusic says links to many news items and introductions to TV programmes contain too much substantive information, making the principal item merely repetitious".]

In case you missed it, this interview will be repeated every hour until you can quote it verbatim.