The Virtual Pub
Come Inside... => The Snug => Topic started by: Snoopy on November 14, 2008, 06:41:49 PM
-
The whole day without anyone mentioning Children in Need?
Who will be watching this annual festival of rubbish?
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dun4d.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2006%2F11%2Fpudsey.jpg&hash=a081bf0f77931c5855f842084b3bcdbe87d68f23)
Lets have a poll on the future of this nonsense.
-
What an irony that this should air right at the time when Haringay council's dirty linen is on it's way to the public launderette ::)
-
I've been interviewing all day, and to be honest, I didn't realise it was CiN day until I went to head office with the paperwork and three girls in reception were dressed in bright yellow with balloons attached to them. "Are you giving JOM", ... "I've just got to drop this paperwork off at Human Remains before they go, then I'll be back down," Half an hour with HR, and they'd pissed off home. Job sorted!
And BBC will be a JOM free-zone tonight
-
Yes but have you seen Fiona Bruces's legs? eyes:
-
I've been interviewing all day..
Gizza job?
-
Yes but have you seen Fiona Bruces's legs? eyes:
Will we tonight? eyes:
-
Last time I watched it Joanna Lumley stripped to her undies when someone put up a lot of money if she would.
After that I felt anything else would be an anti-climax
-
Yes but have you seen Fiona Bruces's legs? eyes:
Will we tonight? eyes:
Not for me, off to the pub.
Might pop in for a quick one now they're open.
-
Yes but have you seen Fiona Bruces's legs? eyes:
Will we tonight? eyes:
I believe we may. Pity Natasha KaplinIfuckinwoodski is now on Channel 5.
And Kate Silverton has put her back out and cannot take part the clumsy selfish biatch. noooo:
-
I LOVE IT!
And they opened the show with my Boyz cloud9:
-
I LOVE IT!
And they opened the show with my Boyz cloud9:
Oh Wenchy! How could you? noooo:
-
It's a Wench Family tradition. Mr Wench is watching something in the bedroom and Mother Wench and I are watching it together. (Her in Spain, me here, same programme, webcams on. I love the internet! cloud9: )
-
Skinny blonde in tiny dress on at the mo
-
Plus there is a special preview of the Christmas Dr Who on. Which means, the Lovely David. cloud9:
-
Plus there is a special preview of the Christmas Dr Who on. Which means, the Lovely David. cloud9:
Would it surprise you to know that he holds no interest for me?
-
Which is why I mentioned the skinny blonde in a tiny black dress earlier! ::)
Also, Oliver Twist, was not a Welsh urchin! Banghead
-
Which is why I mentioned the skinny blonde in a tiny black dress earlier! ::)
Also, Oliver Twist, was not a Welsh urchin! Banghead
What? eeek:
-
Skinny blonde in tiny dress on at the mo
WhoTF is she? Shrugs:
-
Oliver musical bit on CIN. surrender:
-
Tess or Flavia do it for any of you? They are on now.
-
noooo: I will not be watching any of it.
Wogan for a hour in the mornings I can just about take but 7 hours of Wogan on TV is more than flesh and blood can stand.
-
Miser!
-
Tess or Flavia do it for any of you? They are on now.
Tess. cloud9:
-
Miser!
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.therealmartha.com%2FHolidaze02%2Fchr_snoopy.JPG&hash=d43522fe45f656edee71ee81f4854134642f5fd3)
-
But seriously where does all this money go?
I have three kids ~ they all took donations into school today.
For years, until recently outed in the press, Wogan charged the BBC several thousands for his services on the night.
Thousands of pounds to front a charity show in which the actors, singers, dancers, mostly earning less than half his annual income performed free. Had he given his fee to the charity I would have been more kindly disposed toward him and his efforts. His excuse "I am self employed, I didn't realise that others were not being paid to appear"
In 2005 he received £1300 per hour for the 7 hour show ~ a total in excess of £9,000 for an evenings blathering.
His "salary" at the BBC is said to be £800,000 per annum
http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/celebrity_wogan.asp
-
council's dirty linen is on it's way to the public launderette
Its evil:
-
The whole day without anyone mentioning Children in Need?
Who will be watching this annual festival of rubbish?
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dun4d.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2006%2F11%2Fpudsey.jpg&hash=a081bf0f77931c5855f842084b3bcdbe87d68f23)
Lets have a poll on the future of this nonsense.
its not rubbish...its fun an it raises so much money for kids that need it..i love it and in a good cause.. so far so good... point:
-
We pay taxes. evil:
-
noooo: I will not be watching any of it.
Wogan for a hour in the mornings I can just about take but 7 hours of Wogan on TV is more than flesh and blood can stand.
he is such a funny man, he makes it so much fun... eyes:
-
We pay taxes. evil:
dont we all... ::)
-
But seriously where does all this money go?
I have three kids ~ they all took donations into school today.
For years, until recently outed in the press, Wogan charged the BBC several thousands for his services on the night.
Thousands of pounds to front a charity show in which the actors, singers, dancers, mostly earning less than half his annual income performed free. Had he given his fee to the charity I would have bneen more kindly disposed toward him and his efforts. His excuse "I am self employed, I didn't realise that others were not being paid to appear"
In 2005 he received £1300 per hour for the 7 hour show ~ a toatl in excess of £9,000 for an evenings blathering.
His "salary" at the BBC is said to be £800,000 per annum
http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/celebrity_wogan.asp
Lighten up you old moaning misers...it goes to children .....that are not a priveledged as some for many differant reasons..
-
And it is a good evenings entertainment!
-
For £9.5k for an evening talking on TV I could make it fun.
This little show will cost us TV licence payers over £2million and rob many smaller charities of much needed donations. Strangely although a few charity shows (Children in Need, Red Nose Day, Feed the World) raise millions the overall give to charity does not increase. So one star's boastful raising of a few million costs other charities their income.
I would rather choose to whom I direct my charity instead of throwing it in a bucket "For a good cause".
I support the RNLB and Service Charities. I also support three children who have never received any help from Mr Wogan and co despite being classified as "In Poverty" by the government's own standards.
If you enjoy the "entertainment" by all means do so ~ just don't expect me to.
-
To be honest Snoopy I don't.
-
Me neither.
-
I meant I don't expect you to enjoy it. For me it's the "curate's egg"
-
Oh ~ I see. Well fair nuff. It is a bit like an old fashioned variety show I guess but I watch TV so seldom these days that I know few of the so called stars who appear and the whole things bores me rigid. I also feel quite strongly about the points I have made regarding Wogan's fees and the reduction in the incomes of other charities because the Beeb can and do afford, out of my licence fee, to swamp the nation with this evening's effort to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat.
But then again would we have got 36 + posts out of this if I hadn't raised the subject.
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
-
I'm all the way with you Snoop. Can't stand Wogan anymore, pompous old gin swiggin' tosser. He's not even the slightest bit funny imo. Five Live in the mornings now where i know you aren't going to be bombarded with constant overly self important ramblings and a certain 'brand' of his so called 'wit' and inuendos. ::)
Time he was pensioned off imo.
Like you , I also have my doubts as to where all this money goes to too. rubschin:
Call me a grumpy old cynic if you wish. ::)
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
As for the show, I can't see the 'need' for it... surely if the government can rustle up £500B for the banks there is no need for charities to go begging for money? Lord knows, we all pay enough in income tax then duty and VAT on our taxed earnings that there should be no need for charity if the government spent our money wisely? Doesn't giving to charity just let them off the hook to waste and trough more...?
See also cancer research.
As for the show itself, if it is so 'entertaining' why don't the BBC or other broadcasters do such a thing anyway - after all that's what we pay them for isn't it?
Humbug.
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
As for the show, I can't see the 'need' for it... surely if the government can rustle up £500B for the banks there is no need for charities to go begging for money? Lord knows, we all pay enough in income tax then duty and VAT on our taxed earnings that there should be no need for charity if the government spent our money wisely? Doesn't giving to charity just let them off the hook to waste and trough more...?
See also cancer research.
As for the show itself, if it is so 'entertaining' why don't the BBC or other broadcasters do such a thing anyway - after all that's what we pay them for isn't it?
Humbug.
My sentiments entirely.
Bolox to humbug, it's true.
More like just a load of bah to me. ;)
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi27.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc172%2Fb0nz0%2FPair.jpg&hash=2bfa40fb5d4449af483144d3ad55af3651d1a617)
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
Full 'ouse was it? ::)
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
Full 'ouse was it? ::)
No, just the two of us... plenty of spare seats like... whistle:
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
Full 'ouse was it? ::)
No, just the two of us... plenty of spare seats like... whistle:
All 3...sorry 4 of them?
Smell of fresh paint must be putting the cussies off p'raps?
If there was just the two of you like, why don't you just sit in the lounge and watch the telly like the rest of us normal mortals?
Just a passing thought like. whistle:
-
I didn't watch it... I was watching No Country for Old Men in my cinema like... whistle:
Full 'ouse was it? ::)
No, just the two of us... plenty of spare seats like... whistle:
All 3...sorry 4 of them?
Smell of fresh paint must be putting the cussies off p'raps?
If there was just the two of you like, why don't you just sit in the lounge and watch the telly like the rest of us normal mortals?
Just a passing thought like. whistle:
Because the lounge doesn't have a 3m screen and 1,500W of surround sound... just like a cinema like... ::)
It is like going to the cinema but with wine and popcorn and no feral scum rustling around... and you can pause the film when you need a piss like... happy088
-
S'pose it's handy for a quick grope and snog on the back row too like? cloud9:
Do your popcorn buckets 'ave 'oles in the bottom of them too like? whistle:
-
noooo:
-
well me an wenchy loved it..it was great and good fun and laughs...laughting is good for you too.... eyes:
-
I'm sure it was excellent... especially the 'guilt' sequences where they show film of malnourished children with their limbs missing like - I bet you laughed like a drain... noooo:
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
I was talking about a lot of smaller charities whose takings have declined because of the muscle that the big boys can put behind such things as these TV marathons. In total it is reckoned that we, as a nation, give roughly the same amount to charity per capita as we always have but the big ones are soaking it all up and the little fish are slowly going under. Please don't ask for a source as I read this somewhere (hospital waiting room magazine I think) and it rang true. When I was involved with Children in Need I sank all my effort into it. When I stopped (mainly because of Wogan's greed) I found I still gave the same amount to charity over the year but I spread it around more and was more selective as to the causes I was supporting. I also became more interested in how the money was spent.
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
I was talking about a lot of smaller charities whose takings have declined because of the muscle that the big boys can put behind such things as these TV marathons. In total it is reckoned that we, as a nation, give roughly the same amount to charity per capita as we always have but the big ones are soaking it all up and the little fish are slowly going under. Please don't ask for a source as I read this somewhere (hospital waiting room magazine I think) and it rang true. When I was involved with Children in Need I sank all my effort into it. When I stopped (mainly because of Wogan's greed) I found I still gave the same amount to charity over the year but I spread it around more and was more selective as to the causes I was supporting. I also became more interested in how the money was spent.
for gods sake lighten up.it was supposed to be fun...write to bbc an ask for a detailed account of where every penny goes then it can set your mind at rest....right its finished for another yr...so dont wana hear anymore bloody moaning...thought women where bad... Banghead
-
scared2:
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
I was talking about a lot of smaller charities whose takings have declined because of the muscle that the big boys can put behind such things as these TV marathons. In total it is reckoned that we, as a nation, give roughly the same amount to charity per capita as we always have but the big ones are soaking it all up and the little fish are slowly going under. Please don't ask for a source as I read this somewhere (hospital waiting room magazine I think) and it rang true. When I was involved with Children in Need I sank all my effort into it. When I stopped (mainly because of Wogan's greed) I found I still gave the same amount to charity over the year but I spread it around more and was more selective as to the causes I was supporting. I also became more interested in how the money was spent.
for gods sake lighten up.it was supposed to be fun...write to bbc an ask for a detailed account of where every penny goes then it can set your mind at rest....right its finished for another yr...so dont wana hear anymore bloody moaning...thought women where bad... Banghead
I'll let you have a response as soon as Bletchley Park tell me what you said.
-
Mrs TG is not familiar with Bletchley Park. She is astounded by your level of grumpiness tonight.
-
I am not grumpy ~ what is it with some wimmin that the minute you say something contrary to their opinion you are classed as Grumpy?
I've divorced wimmin for less. How very dare she assume that she knows what is in my mind. evil:
Actually I am perfectly happy, working away at the magazine and am well pleased at being ahead of schedule.
Come on TG ~ we are friends ~ give me the code and I'll work it out for myself ~ is it a transposition of numbers for letters or more complex than that?
-
I am not grumpy ~ what is it with some wimmin that the minute you say something contrary to their opinion you are classed as Grumpy?
I've divorced wimmin for less. How very dare she assume that she knows what is in my mind. evil:
Actually I am perfectly happy, working away at the magazine and am well pleased at being ahead of schedule.
Come on TG ~ we are friends ~ give me the code and I'll work it out for myself ~ is it a transposition of numbers for letters or more complex than that?
cos you would ignore the posts it they dident get to you...lol nite nite xx point:
ps i am off to watch strictly....i await the insults of that now.....
-
Come on TG ~ we are friends ~ give me the code and I'll work it out for myself ~ is it a transposition of numbers for letters or more complex than that?
It is cunning. So cunning even you will not be able to work it out. On the other hand, if you should work it out will you please let me know the secret.
I will pay you. rubschin:
-
Bletchley have responded:
They say it is
Gibberish
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
I was talking about a lot of smaller charities whose takings have declined because of the muscle that the big boys can put behind such things as these TV marathons. In total it is reckoned that we, as a nation, give roughly the same amount to charity per capita as we always have but the big ones are soaking it all up and the little fish are slowly going under. Please don't ask for a source as I read this somewhere (hospital waiting room magazine I think) and it rang true. When I was involved with Children in Need I sank all my effort into it. When I stopped (mainly because of Wogan's greed) I found I still gave the same amount to charity over the year but I spread it around more and was more selective as to the causes I was supporting. I also became more interested in how the money was spent.
for gods sake lighten up.it was supposed to be fun...write to bbc an ask for a detailed account of where every penny goes then it can set your mind at rest....right its finished for another yr...so dont wana hear anymore bloody moaning...thought women where bad... Banghead
I'll let you have a response as soon as Bletchley Park tell me what you said.
????????????? Write to BBC or charity commision they can give you answers.....im outa hear it not good in pub tonite... noooo:
-
Good night. char062
-
...to the detriment of a lot of hard working folk struggling to manage to keep afloat
I don't understand what you're getting at here.
Certainly Wogan should never have asked for or been paid a fee but it probably doesn't rob other charities of donations. My feeling is that it taps those who don't normally give.
Off to watch the QI special now.
I was talking about a lot of smaller charities whose takings have declined because of the muscle that the big boys can put behind such things as these TV marathons. In total it is reckoned that we, as a nation, give roughly the same amount to charity per capita as we always have but the big ones are soaking it all up and the little fish are slowly going under. Please don't ask for a source as I read this somewhere (hospital waiting room magazine I think) and it rang true. When I was involved with Children in Need I sank all my effort into it. When I stopped (mainly because of Wogan's greed) I found I still gave the same amount to charity over the year but I spread it around more and was more selective as to the causes I was supporting. I also became more interested in how the money was spent.
for gods sake lighten up.it was supposed to be fun...write to bbc an ask for a detailed account of where every penny goes then it can set your mind at rest....right its finished for another yr...so dont wana hear anymore bloody moaning...thought women where bad... Banghead
I'll let you have a response as soon as Bletchley Park tell me what you said.
????????????? Write to BBC or charity commision they can give you answers.....im outa hear it not good in pub tonite... noooo:
She seems annoyed for some reason.
PMT rubschin:
-
At her age? eveilgrin:
-
scared:
-
WUSS! Banghead
Say what you like. It's a free country (just ::) ) and freedom of speech so there! cussing:
-
eeek:
Rather strident aren't we this evening gentlemen?
eeek:
-
We are cross with wimmin and others evil:
Reasonably
-
Should I be keeping a low profile? scared2:
-
No, we are harmless angel1
-
That is what they all say. scared2:
-
Should I be keeping a low profile? scared2:
Careful, they might think you mean 'lie down'. noooo:
-
Should I be keeping a low profile? scared2:
Yes
Got me bears 'ed on tonight. evil:
-
But, but I haven't done anything!
I think the Growler house needs a second tv. Nick, can't you give him yours out of the box!
-
Anyhooo...
I've been thinking about this while painting like... Two things strike me about the show.
Charity:
I remember contributing to the first (or one of the first) televised Children in Need things which must have been twenty years ago? I stumbled in from the pub with a kebab and felt so guilty at the sight of children with no drinking water that I called up and donated fifty quid I could ill-afford. The lady in the call centre said I was "very generous" which made me feel better about myself...
Why is it that twenty years and millions of Pounds later there are still children with no water or grub?
In that time governments around the world have pissed trillions of Pounds of our money up the wall on pointless schemes and projects yet kids still need help from people donating money they can ill-afford?
India has just sent a rocket to the moon FFS - a country not exactly short of a starving kid or two... noooo:
The point is that it is our money that the government is pissing away - cash forcibly taken from us in taxes and duties (not forgetting VAT) on the goods we choose to purchase ands it should be us, the taxpayer that decides if it is spend on starving kiddies or troughing politicians and their ridiculous schemes.
Entertainment:
Likewise with the entertainment value of Children in Need.
Remember you pay for the BBC with a non-optional tax in the form of the licence fee.
They are not doing you a favour by showing celebrities doing stupid things, you are paying them to do it…
If you want to see the news and weather teams performing “You’re the one that I want” while riding unicycles they should bloody well do it… ever night, after Eastenders.
If you want to see the entire cast of Eastenders performing a bizarre sex act with Wellard then they should do that too – after the watershed.
But they should show shows that you want without having to intersperse them with pictures of kiddies with no arms or dying of cancer without reasonable palliative care because the money isn't available.
And they should stop paying tosspots like Ross £6M per year too... I wonder how much of his hard-earned cash was donated towards the total.
That is all…
-
Anyhooo...
I've been thinking about this while painting like... Two things strike me about the show.
Charity:
I remember contributing to the first (or one of the first) televised Children in Need things which must have been twenty years ago? I stumbled in from the pub with a kebab and felt so guilty at the sight of children with no drinking water that I called up and donated fifty quid I could ill-afford. The lady in the call centre said I was "very generous" which made me feel better about myself...
Why is it that twenty years and millions of Pounds later there are still children with no water or grub?
In that time governments around the world have pissed trillions of Pounds of our money up the wall on pointless schemes and projects yet kids still need help from people donating money they can ill-afford?
India has just sent a rocket to the moon FFS - a country not exactly short of a starving kid or two... noooo:
The point is that it is our money that the government is pissing away - cash forcibly taken from us in taxes and duties (not forgetting VAT) on the goods we choose to purchase ands it should be us, the taxpayer that decides if it is spend on starving kiddies or troughing politicians and their ridiculous schemes.
Entertainment:
Likewise with the entertainment value of Children in Need.
Remember you pay for the BBC with a non-optional tax in the form of the licence fee.
They are not doing you a favour by showing celebrities doing stupid things, you are paying them to do it…
If you want to see the news and weather teams performing “You’re the one that I want” while riding unicycles they should bloody well do it… ever night, after Eastenders.
If you want to see the entire cast of Eastenders performing a bizarre sex act with Wellard then they should do that too – after the watershed.
But they should show shows that you want without having to intersperse them with pictures of kiddies with no arms or dying of cancer without reasonable palliative care because the money isn't available.
And they should stop paying tosspots like Ross £6M per year too... I wonder how much of his hard-earned cash was donated towards the total.
That is all…
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.postimage.org%2FPq18th59.gif&hash=8ea05f9a8b735ae2d6b396aba9206eb420f957f2) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=Pq18th59)
-
At her age? eveilgrin:
i am not much older than mrs s...so yep!
not pmt just astounded at grumpiness in men very usual or must be grumpy pensioner age coming out..LOL eyes:
-
At her age? eveilgrin:
i am not much older than mrs s...so yep!
not pmt just astounded at grumpiness in men very usual or must be grumpy pensioner age coming out..LOL eyes:
Mrs S#2 is 49 and has indeed passed through the menopause and we have no PMT ~ actually never did have with her. Now her daughter is a different matter as was Mrs S#1 and her daughter too.
-
Anyhooo...
I've been thinking about this while painting like... Two things strike me about the show.
Charity:
I remember contributing to the first (or one of the first) televised Children in Need things which must have been twenty years ago? I stumbled in from the pub with a kebab and felt so guilty at the sight of children with no drinking water that I called up and donated fifty quid I could ill-afford. The lady in the call centre said I was "very generous" which made me feel better about myself...
Why is it that twenty years and millions of Pounds later there are still children with no water or grub?
In that time governments around the world have pissed trillions of Pounds of our money up the wall on pointless schemes and projects yet kids still need help from people donating money they can ill-afford?
India has just sent a rocket to the moon FFS - a country not exactly short of a starving kid or two... noooo:
The point is that it is our money that the government is pissing away - cash forcibly taken from us in taxes and duties (not forgetting VAT) on the goods we choose to purchase ands it should be us, the taxpayer that decides if it is spend on starving kiddies or troughing politicians and their ridiculous schemes.
Entertainment:
Likewise with the entertainment value of Children in Need.
Remember you pay for the BBC with a non-optional tax in the form of the licence fee.
They are not doing you a favour by showing celebrities doing stupid things, you are paying them to do it…
If you want to see the news and weather teams performing “You’re the one that I want” while riding unicycles they should bloody well do it… ever night, after Eastenders.
If you want to see the entire cast of Eastenders performing a bizarre sex act with Wellard then they should do that too – after the watershed.
But they should show shows that you want without having to intersperse them with pictures of kiddies with no arms or dying of cancer without reasonable palliative care because the money isn't available.
And they should stop paying tosspots like Ross £6M per year too... I wonder how much of his hard-earned cash was donated towards the total.
That is all…
It was a nice nite of entertainent lifts you from the miseries of life sometimes and is not a crime
you write to bbc too to affirm your findings, sure you lot should be in grumpy watever forum .... whistle:
-
At her age? eveilgrin:
i am not much older than mrs s...so yep!
not pmt just astounded at grumpiness in men very usual or must be grumpy pensioner age coming out..LOL eyes:
Mrs S#2 is 49 and has indeed passed through the menopause and we have no PMT ~ actually never did have with her. Now her daughter is a different matter as was Mrs S#1 and her daughter too.
Your daughters too, not just hers..i am only 47 and not had the menopause as yet sadly...cant come quick enough but probably another good few yrs of womens problems etc ... scared2:
-
I expect Mr TG agrees eveilgrin:
-
At her age? eveilgrin:
i am not much older than mrs s...so yep!
not pmt just astounded at grumpiness in men very usual or must be grumpy pensioner age coming out..LOL eyes:
Mrs S#2 is 49 and has indeed passed through the menopause and we have no PMT ~ actually never did have with her. Now her daughter is a different matter as was Mrs S#1 and her daughter too.
Your daughters too, not just hers..i am only 47 and not had the menopause as yet sadly...cant come quick enough but probably another good few yrs of womens problems etc ... scared2:
No ~ deffo their daughters ~ I saw them being born and can confirm from whence they came ~ my part in the process is not as easily proven. whistle:
Mrs S#2 didn't really notice the menopause, apart from a slight concern that she may have been pregnant when periods just stopped. Last week the Doctor asked her whether she was experiencing "flushes" and stuff and she said no but then I haven't had a period in over two years. "Then you're through it" he said
-
Last week the Doctor asked her whether she was experiencing "flushes" and stuff and she said no but then I haven't had a period in over two years. "Then you're through it" he said
Do Clintons do cards for this? They do for every other bloody event rubschin:
-
drumroll:
-
Last week the Doctor asked her whether she was experiencing "flushes" and stuff and she said no but then I haven't had a period in over two years. "Then you're through it" he said
Do Clintons do cards for this? They do for every other bloody event rubschin:
I doubt that they would sell many ~ most men are too frit to mention the subject let alone give her a card.
-
But wimmin would send them ::)
-
But only in a sort of " point: Oh look, you've got OLD!" manner
-
Maybe we could have a competition to design a suitable card amd message of greeting rubschin:
-
Won't werk like whistle: