Discussion:
Spoiler Friday 26 July
Add Reply
Sally Thompson
2019-07-26 19:47:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C

That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-26 20:28:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 26 Jul 2019 19:47:34 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
They just had to take the house away, didn't they? And such obvious
disaster signalling. SO clunky. Emma talks about the furniture she
will buy, Ed talks about it,. They go and admire the house and next
day Tim pesters Adam and Will. How likely is that?
Mike
2019-07-27 06:34:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On 26 Jul 2019 19:47:34 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
They just had to take the house away, didn't they? And such obvious
disaster signalling. SO clunky. Emma talks about the furniture she
will buy, Ed talks about it,. They go and admire the house and next
day Tim pesters Adam and Will. How likely is that?
With TA S.W’s, ...... VERY!
--
Toodle Pip
Jane Vernon
2019-07-27 07:05:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On 26 Jul 2019 19:47:34 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
They just had to take the house away, didn't they? And such obvious
disaster signalling. SO clunky. Emma talks about the furniture she
will buy, Ed talks about it,. They go and admire the house and next
day Tim pesters Adam and Will. How likely is that?
Emma has already bought the furniture, on tick.
--
Jane
The Potter in the Purple socks - to reply, please remove PURPLE
BTME

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook.htm - Umrats' recipes
Jane Vernon
2019-07-27 07:04:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit. I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits. Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick. They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning. ( I listen with breakfast.)
--
Jane
The Potter in the Purple socks - to reply, please remove PURPLE
BTME

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook.htm - Umrats' recipes
Sally Thompson
2019-07-27 08:12:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jane Vernon
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit. I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits. Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick. They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning. ( I listen with breakfast.)
Also, Ed will never forgive Will. If Ed had spilt the beans on Will taking
Poppy to work, Will might well have lost his job and Poppy.
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Chris McMillan
2019-07-27 12:14:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Jane Vernon
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit. I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits. Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick. They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning. ( I listen with breakfast.)
Also, Ed will never forgive Will. If Ed had spilt the beans on Will taking
Poppy to work, Will might well have lost his job and Poppy.
On the other hand, Adam and Will can personally vouch for Tim’s bully boy
tactics - which if it brings Tim and gang to boot might help Ed a little.
On the other hand it’s all too likely, that Tim and gang now leg it pronto
before Harrison gets to work.

Sincerely Chris
Serena Blanchflower
2019-07-28 15:16:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.

[1] I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
--
Best wishes, Serena
As I hurtled through space, one thought kept crossing my mind - every
part of this rocket was supplied by the lowest bidder. (John Glenn)
Mike
2019-07-28 15:20:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1] I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
Is the habit of listening to TA anything like smoking or gambling I wonder?
I can give it up at any time I like - I have done it loads of times! ;-)
--
Toodle Pip
Serena Blanchflower
2019-07-28 15:26:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1] I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
Is the habit of listening to TA anything like smoking or gambling I wonder?
I can give it up at any time I like - I have done it loads of times! ;-)
It certainly feels a bit like that...
--
Best wishes, Serena
It's never too late to be what you might have been (George Eliot)
steveski
2019-07-29 00:02:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1] I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
Is the habit of listening to TA anything like smoking or gambling I wonder?
I can give it up at any time I like - I have done it loads of times! ;-)
I'll just listen to one more . . . alright - perhaps two . . . but that's
it . . . really - oh, God . . .
--
Steveski
Dumrat
2019-07-28 15:30:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen to the Grundies
lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely that I'm going to stop listening
(again, yes this does seem to be becoming a habit in its own right).  I really can't think
of any storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms with his
abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1]  I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled well and is an
interesting storyline.
Same here, for everything, Serena (except I fell asleep during Thursday's epi and after
reading about it and Friday's epi, have not bothered to look for it on Listen Again
because it seems disappointing and snot wurf it, so I'm going to leave it).
--
Salaam Alaykum,
Anne, Exceptionally Traditionally-built Dumrat
Jane Vernon
2019-07-28 17:24:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right).  I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1]  I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
A minority, but NA.
--
Jane
The Potter in the Purple socks - to reply, please remove PURPLE
BTME

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook.htm - Umrats' recipes
Penny
2019-07-28 19:24:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 18:24:35 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
Post by Serena Blanchflower
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right).  I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1]  I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
A minority, but NA.
Indeed.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-28 22:31:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 18:24:35 +0100, Jane Vernon
[]
Post by Penny
Post by Jane Vernon
Post by Serena Blanchflower
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1]  I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
A minority, but NA.
Indeed.
Can I join your minority?

Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done - certainly acted - to the extent that we are very
involved with the characters.

In the last two days, the American Krimi - I think it's Laura Norder
SVU, the one with Olivia and Stabler anyway - repeated one of their
episodes about it that covers it very well, both the effect on children
and the devastation caused by accusation of the wrong person.

And there's the topical case in the (UK) news, too, of the chap who made
lots of false accusations, who has received quite a long sentence.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Scheisse," said Pooh, trying out his German.
SODAM
2019-07-29 11:16:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
J. P. Gilliver (John) <***@255soft.uk> wrote:
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>

I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
is not about bullying someone into telling you personal things they do not
wish to divulge. It’s mostly about listening.

I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
Mike
2019-07-29 11:26:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SODAM
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>
I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
is not about bullying someone into telling you personal things they do not
wish to divulge. It’s mostly about listening.
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
*Inordinate* years of tedium?
--
Toodle Pip
Min
2019-07-29 21:25:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by SODAM
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>
I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
is not about bullying someone into telling you personal things they do not
wish to divulge. It’s mostly about listening.
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
*Inordinate* years of tedium?
Oh, well played, sir!
--
Min
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-29 12:36:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SODAM
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>
I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
is not about bullying someone into telling you personal things they do not
wish to divulge. It’s mostly about listening.
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I absolutely agree. I was never particularly anti Saint until she
divorced Snappy and began regretting it, being at a loose end and
pushing back into his family life. I blame the stupid woman for the
whole Jim affair. He didn't WANT a party. He didn't WANT to tell her
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling. He wants to live a peaceful life and not go over and over
the events again so he keeps distressing himself. Not even because
Shula wants more excitement and because Snappy has been nagged by her
and he and Jazzer want closure.

I agree she'd make an awful vicar and am shocked that Alan encouraged
her when she went back. Although what he said was that he thought she
would be back. Did he say he thought she'd be good at it? She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here. And someone suggested
she set up riding for the disabled or depressed or those with mental
health problems and let Freddie help full time as her assistant.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-29 13:42:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by SODAM
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>
I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
(As do most of us - which shows that this aspect of the FOTWD is being
well-written; we are really involved with the characters.)
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by SODAM
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
[]
Post by Vicky Ayech
I absolutely agree. I was never particularly anti Saint until she
Me neither; on the whole, I liked her. I of course don't see eye to eye
with her on the matter of faith, but I can usually ignore that in the
same way as accepting someone having a different taste in music.
Actually, though that thought just came to me in passing, I think it
works quite well: as long as it doesn't actually (adversely) affect my
life, that seems a good way to see religion. (Of course, most of them
_do_ affect my life, but not those wielded by most of the folk I know.)
Post by Vicky Ayech
divorced Snappy and began regretting it, being at a loose end and
I even thought the divorce was a reasonable way for them to go - as a
marriage, it had run its course.
Post by Vicky Ayech
pushing back into his family life. I blame the stupid woman for the
whole Jim affair. He didn't WANT a party. He didn't WANT to tell her
Yes, I strongly agreed with Jim on that, and thought it was a Very Bad
Idea; it clearly _was_ a party in all but name. I've _never_ liked the
idea of most parties. (I'll be 60 in April, but think I _will_ escape as
there's no-one in a _position_ to do anything. I hope. And if someone
does, and I turn round and walk out, I think it extremely unfair that it
is _I_ who would be thought of as being unreasonable.)

To be fair, Shula and Al just wanted to do something good for Jim, and
of course had no idea of the abuse history; just the party was a very
bad idea. Had he just snubbed it _without_ there being the abuse story,
I'd still have backed him all the way. The other thing Al had planned -
I forget the exact details, but some visit to something
historical/archaeological (in Yorkshire, was it?) - seemed quite a good
one: partly because it was done _with_ Jim's knowledge, and partly
because Al wasn't looking forward to trudging round ruins in the rain,
or something like that!, but was willing to do it for his Dad.
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I am
aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
Post by Vicky Ayech
He wants to live a peaceful life and not go over and over
the events again so he keeps distressing himself. Not even because
Shula wants more excitement and because Snappy has been nagged by her
and he and Jazzer want closure.
Objectively, I think it's a good point for discussion: is there anything
to be served by outing/punishing the offender (or by not doing so)?
There's the question of whether he's still doing it - I think unlikely
as he's apparently in a wheelchair, but I suppose still possible.
There's the question of whether he should be "punished": as such, I'm
not sure what would be achieved by that, other than: its possible
deterrent effect on other, actual or potential, offenders. As I said,
good discussion fodder.
Post by Vicky Ayech
I agree she'd make an awful vicar and am shocked that Alan encouraged
her when she went back.
He's a kind person.
Post by Vicky Ayech
Although what he said was that he thought she
would be back. Did he say he thought she'd be good at it? She is too
No (-:. At least I don't think he did.
Post by Vicky Ayech
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here. And someone suggested
Why is age a downer on becoming a vicar?
Post by Vicky Ayech
she set up riding for the disabled or depressed or those with mental
health problems and let Freddie help full time as her assistant.
Sounds good in itself - though I, rather selfishly, wouldn't relish it
as part of TA as we'd inevitably hear some of the stories of the
depressed/MHP people, and I don't want any more of that.

If she could just set it up for the _physically_ disabled, that'd be
good. (Though _can_ one, these days, do that, without _having_ to be
open to the depressed/MHP?)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Going to church doesn't make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage
makes you a car." - Laurence J. Peter
Penny
2019-07-30 08:48:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:42:35 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, I strongly agreed with Jim on that, and thought it was a Very Bad
Idea; it clearly _was_ a party in all but name.
When he arrived at the not-party he was genuinely pleased to see many of
the guests and I think would have enjoyed it. It was only when he spotted
wheelchair-man that things turned sour.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I am
aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
Is that what they are trying to do? I've been siding with Jim on the
sleeping dogs aspect. He was functioning well until the not-party. Is it
always a good idea to dig out buried trauma?
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
He wants to live a peaceful life and not go over and over
the events again so he keeps distressing himself. Not even because
Shula wants more excitement and because Snappy has been nagged by her
and he and Jazzer want closure.
Objectively, I think it's a good point for discussion: is there anything
to be served by outing/punishing the offender (or by not doing so)?
There's the question of whether he's still doing it - I think unlikely
as he's apparently in a wheelchair, but I suppose still possible.
There's the question of whether he should be "punished": as such, I'm
not sure what would be achieved by that, other than: its possible
deterrent effect on other, actual or potential, offenders. As I said,
good discussion fodder.
It has occurred to me to wonder how he ended up in a wheelchair. Maybe he
was 'exposed' some years ago and was physically attacked by someone because
of it. Perhaps he has already 'done time' and arrived, the uninvited guest,
to apologise and attempt to atone for his youthful actions.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Mike
2019-07-30 09:02:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:42:35 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, I strongly agreed with Jim on that, and thought it was a Very Bad
Idea; it clearly _was_ a party in all but name.
When he arrived at the not-party he was genuinely pleased to see many of
the guests and I think would have enjoyed it. It was only when he spotted
wheelchair-man that things turned sour.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I am
aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
Is that what they are trying to do? I've been siding with Jim on the
sleeping dogs aspect. He was functioning well until the not-party. Is it
always a good idea to dig out buried trauma?
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
He wants to live a peaceful life and not go over and over
the events again so he keeps distressing himself. Not even because
Shula wants more excitement and because Snappy has been nagged by her
and he and Jazzer want closure.
Objectively, I think it's a good point for discussion: is there anything
to be served by outing/punishing the offender (or by not doing so)?
There's the question of whether he's still doing it - I think unlikely
as he's apparently in a wheelchair, but I suppose still possible.
There's the question of whether he should be "punished": as such, I'm
not sure what would be achieved by that, other than: its possible
deterrent effect on other, actual or potential, offenders. As I said,
good discussion fodder.
It has occurred to me to wonder how he ended up in a wheelchair. Maybe he
was 'exposed' some years ago and was physically attacked by someone because
of it. Perhaps he has already 'done time' and arrived, the uninvited guest,
to apologise and attempt to atone for his youthful actions.
‘Harold ‘ll fix it’?
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-30 10:14:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:42:35 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
dder.
Post by Penny
It has occurred to me to wonder how he ended up in a wheelchair. Maybe he
was 'exposed' some years ago and was physically attacked by someone because
of it. Perhaps he has already 'done time' and arrived, the uninvited guest,
to apologise and attempt to atone for his youthful actions.
‘Harold ‘ll fix it’?
Actually that is an idea for an outcome I could live with. Harrison
investigates and finds Harald did get outed and punished and was in
fact there to say sorry. The whole thing dies down. I am not sure Jim
wants to receive the apology and see no reason Harald should get it
off his chest. Let him live with it.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-30 22:04:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:42:35 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, I strongly agreed with Jim on that, and thought it was a Very Bad
Idea; it clearly _was_ a party in all but name.
When he arrived at the not-party he was genuinely pleased to see many of
the guests and I think would have enjoyed it. It was only when he spotted
Yes, I thought that. A gathering of long-unseen friends does sound like
a nice idea. As long as it doesn't degenerate (I thought twice about
that word, but it is what I meant) into a "party" ...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
wheelchair-man that things turned sour.
... even without that.
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I am
aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
Is that what they are trying to do? I've been siding with Jim on the
sleeping dogs aspect. He was functioning well until the not-party. Is it
always a good idea to dig out buried trauma?
(See later post.)
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Objectively, I think it's a good point for discussion: is there anything
to be served by outing/punishing the offender (or by not doing so)?
There's the question of whether he's still doing it - I think unlikely
as he's apparently in a wheelchair, but I suppose still possible.
There's the question of whether he should be "punished": as such, I'm
not sure what would be achieved by that, other than: its possible
deterrent effect on other, actual or potential, offenders. As I said,
good discussion fodder.
It has occurred to me to wonder how he ended up in a wheelchair. Maybe he
was 'exposed' some years ago and was physically attacked by someone because
A very interesting suggestion! (Would suggest he hadn't revealed
_everything_ though, as nobody had told Jim - from subsequent
discussions/revelations, it seems fairly unlikely that Jim knew of any
such conviction.
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
of it. Perhaps he has already 'done time' and arrived, the uninvited guest,
to apologise and attempt to atone for his youthful actions.
‘Harold ‘ll fix it’?
BTN (-:?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Who came first? Adam or Eve?" "Adam of course; men always do."
Victoria Wood (via Peter Hesketh)
Serena Blanchflower
2019-07-30 19:19:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I am
aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.

That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow him
to regain a measure of peace of mind.
--
Best wishes, Serena
She had a pretty gift for quotation, which is a serviceable substitute
for wit. (W. Somerset Maugham)
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-30 22:13:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Who came first? Adam or Eve?" "Adam of course; men always do."
Victoria Wood (via Peter Hesketh)
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-31 08:02:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
Mike
2019-07-31 08:09:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’

‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-31 08:31:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy.
Indeed there isn't.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Or even during the party, until he saw the gatecrasher.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
Well, he's said a very large number of times that he _doesn't_ wish to
take it further. Also, who are you putting the above words into? If
you're suggesting that that's what S/A/J _should_ have said, I think I
agree with you. I rather suspect that the police wouldn't be _allowed_
to say the above, but would be _obliged_ to follow it up (whatever that
might mean).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I like to think of her as Mary Poppins's evil twin - Michelle Gomez, on the
character "Missy" (female version of the Master?) she plays in Doctor Who
[RT 2017/6/24-30]
Mike
2019-07-31 10:30:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy.
Indeed there isn't.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Or even during the party, until he saw the gatecrasher.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
Well, he's said a very large number of times that he _doesn't_ wish to
take it further. Also, who are you putting the above words into? If
you're suggesting that that's what S/A/J _should_ have said, I think I
agree with you. I rather suspect that the police wouldn't be _allowed_
to say the above, but would be _obliged_ to follow it up (whatever that
might mean).
Yes, those very three!
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-31 10:48:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:31:53 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy.
Indeed there isn't.
Post by Vicky Ayech
Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Or even during the party, until he saw the gatecrasher.
Post by Vicky Ayech
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
Well, he's said a very large number of times that he _doesn't_ wish to
take it further. Also, who are you putting the above words into? If
you're suggesting that that's what S/A/J _should_ have said, I think I
agree with you. I rather suspect that the police wouldn't be _allowed_
to say the above, but would be _obliged_ to follow it up (whatever that
might mean).
There are people currently on news programmes being interviewed about
how the police and media ruined their lives with false accusations.
Umbrella was in parliament. He is suing the police I think. The person
who accused him has been convicted of false evidence, lying etc. I
gather he got some of the information to support his accusation from a
journalist; details about the HoC that made it sound more likely. The
police defence is going to be that they knew the accusation to be
valid.

Now I am thinking that as far as Harrison is concerned all he had was
an upset Jazzer, reporting the abuse to someone else. I think he
might make very careful enquiries. He might not want to get any of
this into the public domain. For all he knows Jazzer could be making
it up for some reason. He has not been giventhe name of the abused
person and to guess, which he might have enough information or gossip
to do, and go and ask Jim would perhaps not be a good idea?

And then what about tracing Harald? That could be done be easy enough.
But then maybe check police files? Wouldthat raise an alarm and make
it likely to become public?
John Ashby
2019-07-31 13:45:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social workers
or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who had come
across this information, whether as part of their duties or not, they
would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it subsequently came
to light that they had known and not done so they would face being
struck off by their professional body.

john
Mike
2019-07-31 13:55:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social workers
or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who had come
across this information, whether as part of their duties or not, they
would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it subsequently came
to light that they had known and not done so they would face being
struck off by their professional body.
john
Jazzer could claim that the state of his mind has been irretrievably
impaired due to exposure to inordinate quantities of ketamine that he
consumed.
--
Toodle Pip
John Ashby
2019-07-31 13:58:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by John Ashby
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social workers
or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who had come
across this information, whether as part of their duties or not, they
would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it subsequently came
to light that they had known and not done so they would face being
struck off by their professional body.
john
Jazzer could claim that the state of his mind has been irretrievably
impaired due to exposure to inordinate quantities of ketamine that he
consumed.
"That never happened" Any current scriptwriter/editor.

john
Mike
2019-07-31 14:52:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by Mike
Post by John Ashby
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social workers
or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who had come
across this information, whether as part of their duties or not, they
would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it subsequently came
to light that they had known and not done so they would face being
struck off by their professional body.
john
Jazzer could claim that the state of his mind has been irretrievably
impaired due to exposure to inordinate quantities of ketamine that he
consumed.
"That never happened" Any current scriptwriter/editor.
john
Err....What never happened???;-)
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-31 20:21:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In message <qhs61r$let$***@dont-email.me>, John Ashby
<***@yahoo.com> writes:
[]
Post by John Ashby
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social
workers or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who
had come across this information, whether as part of their duties or
not, they would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it
subsequently came to light that they had known and not done so they
would face being struck off by their professional body.
john
Interesting information. I'm not sure I think that's a good thing: it's
one of those unintended consequences. I presume the law was changed in
that way in response to (hopefully a lot, if it resulted in a law
change) cases where _lack_ of reporting resulted in the abuse
continuing; however, it now does mean that those who would rather not
report, because they genuinely think that is the best course rather than
they don't want to get involved, have lost that option. In cases like
Jim's, which I think are referred to as "historical" abuse, that option
may well (as we're discussing at length) be a viable one, more than
where the abuse is continuing.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You know what the big secret about posh people is? Most of them are lovely.
- Richard Osman, RT 2016/7/9-15
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-31 20:46:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:21:12 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by John Ashby
I'll point out that if Alastair or Jazzer were doctors or social
workers or teachers (and probably some other professions as well) who
had come across this information, whether as part of their duties or
not, they would have an absolute duty to report. Otherwise if it
subsequently came to light that they had known and not done so they
would face being struck off by their professional body.
john
Interesting information. I'm not sure I think that's a good thing: it's
one of those unintended consequences. I presume the law was changed in
that way in response to (hopefully a lot, if it resulted in a law
change) cases where _lack_ of reporting resulted in the abuse
continuing; however, it now does mean that those who would rather not
report, because they genuinely think that is the best course rather than
they don't want to get involved, have lost that option. In cases like
Jim's, which I think are referred to as "historical" abuse, that option
may well (as we're discussing at length) be a viable one, more than
where the abuse is continuing.
I thought the duty to report was when it involved children or young
people under 18? As an FE college tutor I was made aware of it when
the regulation came in. I can't recall when. We had adults in the
classes but some had 16-19 year olds and we had a sixth form college
too. I think we would be inclined to report anyone who seemed abused
and obviously injured, but sexual abuse or other that was not visible
or obvious that came to our notice would only have been reportable as
a duty if the victim was under 18. I know Jim was when it happened but
I think the regulations were for more current abuse.
Serena Blanchflower
2019-07-31 19:10:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
Are you suggesting that that's how the ideal person should react? If
so, I'd probably agree with you or are you suggesting that that's what
the SWs should have made Alistair, Shula, Jazzer and Fiona should have
behave? If so, I'd disagree, as they are (or are supposed to be) flawed
human beings and having them behave like plaster saints just wouldn't be
realistic.
--
Best wishes, Serena
A man who trusts nobody is apt to be the kind of man nobody trusts
(Harold MacMillan)
Mike
2019-08-01 07:16:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:13:44 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
why he destroyed the keyboard and does not want to go to the police or
counseling.
Yes. And there, the SWs are in on the "conspiracy": giving him the
nightmare (and letting us know about it) is intended to make us think
that maybe letting sleeping dogs lie is perhaps not a good thing - I
am aware of being manipulated and I rebel against it.
That's not the message I took from it. I heard it as suggesting
(correctly, I suspect), that sleeping dogs can be ambushed and woken up
by unexpected events, such as seeing your abuser again after 70+ years.
Once they've been woken up and have transformed into howling, slavering
beasts, it can then be extremely difficult persuading them to curl up
and go back to sleep.
That's where I suspect that Jim may need professional help, to allow
him to regain a measure of peace of mind.
You are right that that can happen, but it doesn't have to; it _may_ be
possible to get the dog to go back to sleep _without_ all the trauma
that "professional help" involves (or can). In what _proportion_ of
cases it can just all be put back away, and in what proportion it will
grow and grow once triggered and need action, I don't know - but I feel
that Jim having the nightmare, and us hearing about it, is pushing "our"
case in one direction. I feel that all the professionals in the matter -
even with the best of intentions (like Shula and Jazzer in their
different ways, not that they're professionals), and not meaning to
ascribe any venial motive - have an interest in suppressing any success
the "leave it alone" option may have.
There is no way to know how many people had experiences that were
traumatic or not in varying degrees and didn't report it and were not
traumatised for the rest of their lives or were for a time and then
got over it and were happy. Jim seemed peaceful until the party.;
Snappy and Jazzer are not and Shula is a busybodying interfering cow.
The three want to push for Something To Be Done.
‘Jim, it happened to you and if you wish to pursue the matter now you have
seen the perpetrator again, then we will do whatever you require of us -
the decision is yours and we must follow your needs as you see fit. Whether
you wish to take the matter further or not - we will support you all the
way.’
‘End of’ as modern parlance would have it!
Are you suggesting that that's how the ideal person should react? If
so, I'd probably agree with you or are you suggesting that that's what
the SWs should have made Alistair, Shula, Jazzer and Fiona should have
behave? If so, I'd disagree, as they are (or are supposed to be) flawed
human beings and having them behave like plaster saints just wouldn't be
realistic.
Yes, the model response.
--
Toodle Pip
Serena Blanchflower
2019-07-29 14:17:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
--
Best wishes, Serena
I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.
Mike
2019-07-29 14:39:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-29 16:31:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
BTN
Sid Nuncius
2019-07-29 17:12:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
BTN
Arguable...but on balance I don't think so. The thing is, it is exactly
the sort of thing JS and his kind would go for; a BTN needs a slightly
more sideways, sly approach, somehow.

I recognise that nominee and nominor may have reason to feel aggrieved,
but it just doesn't feel quite right to me.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2019-07-29 19:10:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem.  I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
BTN
Arguable...but on balance I don't think so.  The thing is, it is exactly
the sort of thing JS and his kind would go for; a BTN needs a slightly
more sideways, sly approach, somehow.
I recognise that nominee and nominor may have reason to feel aggrieved,
but it just doesn't feel quite right to me.
It didn't to JS's victims either :/
Mike
2019-07-30 07:35:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem.  I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
BTN
Arguable...but on balance I don't think so.  The thing is, it is exactly
the sort of thing JS and his kind would go for; a BTN needs a slightly
more sideways, sly approach, somehow.
I recognise that nominee and nominor may have reason to feel aggrieved,
but it just doesn't feel quite right to me.
It didn't to JS's victims either :/
BTN!
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-30 08:11:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem.  I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Might that be the sort of thing Jimmy Savile would have gone for?
BTN
Arguable...but on balance I don't think so.  The thing is, it is exactly
the sort of thing JS and his kind would go for; a BTN needs a slightly
more sideways, sly approach, somehow.
I recognise that nominee and nominor may have reason to feel aggrieved,
but it just doesn't feel quite right to me.
It didn't to JS's victims either :/
BTN!
If Mike and I say BTN and Sid says no is that the requisite 60% mark
passed and we win a nomination?
Nick Leverton
2019-07-29 15:07:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Shula will be 61 in a couple of weeks, and AIUI even an accelerated
ordination course takes a couple of years. Then a further wo years
learning on the job as a curate, and she won't be getting her own
parish much before the age of 66. Clergy retirement age is 70 except
in special circumstances. I think perhaps she may indeed have missed
the boat for this particular route to sainthood ...

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996
Sid Nuncius
2019-07-29 17:19:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Leverton
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Vicky Ayech
She is too
old, as has been pointed out, maybe even here.
I don't think her age would be a problem. I believe that, nowadays,
it's fairly common for people to only train for the priesthood when they
are approaching retirement from a previous career.
Shula will be 61 in a couple of weeks, and AIUI even an accelerated
ordination course takes a couple of years. Then a further wo years
learning on the job as a curate, and she won't be getting her own
parish much before the age of 66. Clergy retirement age is 70 except
in special circumstances. I think perhaps she may indeed have missed
the boat for this particular route to sainthood ...
A Headteacher of a school where I worked retired aged around 64 and was
ordained a few years later. He never had a parish of his own, but
worked very happily as a priest in his local parish (I'm not
sufficiently au fait with C of E terminology to know his exact title).
I'm sure he worked well beyond 70 in this role.

This was 20 years ago, so things may have changed now.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
krw
2019-08-07 10:18:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
And someone suggested
she set up riding for the disabled or depressed or those with mental
health problems and let Freddie help full time as her assistant.
Perhaps Bethany Tucker could pop in for a ride. Our Stephanie used to
love a trot.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Penny
2019-08-07 20:53:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:18:29 +0100, krw <***@whitnet.uk> scrawled in the
dust...
On 29/7/19 13:36, Vicky Ayech wrote;
I realise 9 days isn't that long in the scheme of things but do we need to
rename the Gillivery?
A keg of Whitbread perhaps?
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
krw
2019-08-07 21:33:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
dust...
On 29/7/19 13:36, Vicky Ayech wrote;
I realise 9 days isn't that long in the scheme of things but do we need to
rename the Gillivery?
A keg of Whitbread perhaps?
I have been away on my holidays and I have now caught up. Although I
have not listened to the programme as yet.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Jim Easterbrook
2019-08-07 21:38:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by Penny
dust...
On 29/7/19 13:36, Vicky Ayech wrote;
I realise 9 days isn't that long in the scheme of things but do we need
to rename the Gillivery?
A keg of Whitbread perhaps?
I have been away on my holidays and I have now caught up. Although I
have not listened to the programme as yet.
I have also been on holiday. I returned to 444 UMRA posts but employed Mr
Mark Read to avoid burdening 'rats with my views on old news. I also
decided nothing that happened in Ambridge during my absence needed my
attention.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0
Penny
2019-08-08 09:00:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:33:36 +0100, krw <***@whitnet.uk> scrawled in the
dust...
Post by krw
Post by Penny
dust...
On 29/7/19 13:36, Vicky Ayech wrote;
I realise 9 days isn't that long in the scheme of things but do we need to
rename the Gillivery?
A keg of Whitbread perhaps?
I have been away on my holidays and I have now caught up. Although I
have not listened to the programme as yet.
I realised that, hope you had a good time, welcome back.

Reference to Gillivering simply because suddenly there were lots of posts
from you.

I'm afraid I found some of your comments puzzling because I couldn't recall
what the thread (or its various sub-threads) was about. I'm all for
snipping but think you may have over-done it here and there.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
krw
2019-08-08 09:54:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
I'm all for
snipping but think you may have over-done it here and there.
Sorry for oversnipping. A rare affliction I think.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Mike
2019-08-08 15:34:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by Penny
I'm all for
snipping but think you may have over-done it here and there.
Sorry for oversnipping. A rare affliction I think.
Almost unheard of I’d say.;-)
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-08-08 20:44:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by krw
Post by Penny
I'm all for
snipping but think you may have over-done it here and there.
Sorry for oversnipping. A rare affliction I think.
Far rarer than undersnipping (or no-snipping).
Post by Mike
Almost unheard of I’d say.;-)
There _are_ some inveterate oversnippers on some of the 'groups I take.
(Never quote enough for you to work out what they are on about.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You know what the big secret about posh people is? Most of them are lovely.
- Richard Osman, RT 2016/7/9-15
Mike
2019-08-09 08:09:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
J. P. Gilliver (John) <***@255soft.uk> wrote:
Snip-snip.

Yes, can be difficult. ;-)
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2019-08-08 07:23:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
dust...
On 29/7/19 13:36, Vicky Ayech wrote;
I realise 9 days isn't that long in the scheme of things but do we need to
rename the Gillivery?
A keg of Whitbread perhaps?
Oh? What ales you Penny? ;-)
--
Toodle Pip
Chris McMillan
2019-07-29 12:55:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SODAM
<mega snip>
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, I don't think it _is_ a minority: the majority of UMRA
comments I've seen think it is being well handled. We're irritated by
various aspects of the storyline, such as Shula (and some of us by the
"if you have been affected"s), but I think we on the whole think it's
being very well done
<snip>
I fell like punching Shula whenever she starts noseying in on Jim’s
problem. She has been pushing and probing, despite repeatedly being asked
not to. On this showing, she would make the worst vicar ever. Counselling
is not about bullying someone into telling you personal things they do not
wish to divulge. It’s mostly about listening.
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of churchgoers in
general is falling.

Sincerely Chris
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-29 13:12:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Going to church doesn't make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage
makes you a car." - Laurence J. Peter
John Ashby
2019-07-29 13:52:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of
churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.

john
Mike
2019-07-29 14:36:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of
churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
john
How about a Trappist Monk’s retreat devoid of any technology more recent
than the 16th. century? ;-)
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-07-29 15:53:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of
churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_
in the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
john
Yes, that could be good. And Judy (have I got that right?) might like
it, too.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Dook, that was great but I think the line needs
awe. Can you do it again, giving it just a little awe?"

"Sure, George," said Wayne and looking up at the cross said:
"Aw, truly this man is the son of God."
(recounted in Radio Times, 30 March-5 April 2013.)
Sid Nuncius
2019-07-29 17:25:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<Shula's ordination process>
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
One little maid[1] who, all unwary, is off to a ladies' seminary?

[1]FSVO "little maid".
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
SODAM
2019-07-29 18:37:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
John Ashby <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<bad snip>
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
Oh yes! That’s it. Brilliant. While there, she could meet and partner with
Cuthbert, a fellow student. Then they could go off abroad and take up
positions as missionaries.
--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
BrritSki
2019-07-29 19:11:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SODAM
<bad snip>
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
Oh yes! That’s it. Brilliant. While there, she could meet and partner with
Cuthbert, a fellow student. Then they could go off abroad and take up
positions as missionaries.
Is that how they were inseminated ?
Sam Plusnet
2019-07-29 22:21:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by SODAM
<bad snip>
Post by John Ashby
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
would/will indeed be tedious.
Not if they pack her off to a seminary in a distant part of the country.
Oh yes! That’s it. Brilliant. While there, she could meet and partner with
Cuthbert, a fellow student. Then they could go off abroad and take up
positions as missionaries.
Is that how they were inseminated ?
I read SODAM's post & looked for a quick follow-up from Brritters.
In contrast to TA, UMRA rarely disappoints.
--
Sam Plusnet
Chris McMillan
2019-07-29 16:33:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
But would anyone know how typical it is of more than one flavour? If its
too detailed people will give up through boredom or see it as complicated
or not relevant even? If there’s not much and it’s spread thinly over
those several years, it’ll make no sense. Perhaps treating it much in the
same way as all the other ‘education’ is, will be the best way in the end.
Eg Harrison and his police exams, the various uni student years.

Sincerely Chris
Mike
2019-07-29 16:41:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
But would anyone know how typical it is of more than one flavour? If its
too detailed people will give up through boredom or see it as complicated
or not relevant even? If there’s not much and it’s spread thinly over
those several years, it’ll make no sense. Perhaps treating it much in the
same way as all the other ‘education’ is, will be the best way in the end.
Eg Harrison and his police exams, the various uni student years.
Sincerely Chris
We are of course forgetting that the S.W.’s may decide to ‘fast track’ her
Sainthood err.... I mean Ordination so who knows how quickly she could jump
through all the hurdles and start her seminarian what nots?
--
Toodle Pip
Sam Plusnet
2019-07-29 22:25:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Chris McMillan
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
I wonder how many listeners even *care* since the numbers of churchgoers in
general is falling.
Sincerely Chris
I think a proportion of non-churchgoers would still be _interested_ in
the _process_. Though I agree that with the Shula character, it
would/will indeed be tedious.
But would anyone know how typical it is of more than one flavour? If its
too detailed people will give up through boredom or see it as complicated
or not relevant even? If there’s not much and it’s spread thinly over
those several years, it’ll make no sense. Perhaps treating it much in the
same way as all the other ‘education’ is, will be the best way in the end.
Eg Harrison and his police exams, the various uni student years.
Sincerely Chris
We are of course forgetting that the S.W.’s may decide to ‘fast track’ her
Sainthood err.... I mean Ordination so who knows how quickly she could jump
through all the hurdles and start her seminarian what nots?
True. In a single leap she could become Arch Bish of Netherborn by the
weekend.
--
Sam Plusnet
krw
2019-08-07 10:17:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SODAM
I hope this storyline does not proceed to following Shula through tedious
years towards ordination.
Inevitably it did. I think Alan should have advised her not to proceed.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
krw
2019-08-07 10:16:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
And there's the topical case in the (UK) news, too, of the chap who made
lots of false accusations, who has received quite a long sentence.
However due to the national sentiment and poor police objectivity a
number of lives were severely damaged by the false accusations. And not
simply from this accuser - I cite Gamabccini (sp?) and Richards as well.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Sam Plusnet
2019-08-07 19:39:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
And there's the topical case in the (UK) news, too, of the chap who
made lots of false accusations, who has received quite a long sentence.
However due to the national sentiment and poor police objectivity a
number of lives were severely damaged by the false accusations.  And not
simply from this accuser - I cite Gamabccini (sp?) and Richards as well.
And there was me thinking of Titus Oats.
--
Sam Plusnet
Vicky Ayech
2019-07-28 21:02:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 16:16:20 +0100, Serena Blanchflower
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by Sally Thompson
S
P
A
C
E
H
E
R
E
T
H
O
U
G
H
I
A
M
M
O
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
That's really depressed me and I wish I hadn't listened.
I'm a creature of habit.  I think it's hugely unlikely I'll ever stop
listening, but this storyline is the pits.  Emma has already bought a
lot of furniture for the house on tick.  They will be bankrupted,
literally, and have nowhere to live.
I fear for Emma's anger and Ed's sanity.
It will all be horrible.
Not a pleasant way to start a Saturday morning.  ( I listen with
breakfast.)
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
[1] I know I'm in a minority in umra in thinking this is being handled
well and is an interesting storyline.
You are right in feeling it is not a pleasant way to spend 15 minutes
now. All the stories seem to be depressing. And as I am worried they
will pressure Jim and not let him get back his life to normal that
makes it worse.
Fenny
2019-07-28 22:25:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 16:16:20 +0100, Serena Blanchflower
Post by Serena Blanchflower
I am also a creature of habit but I feel I really don't want to listen
to the Grundies lives falling apart, once again, so I think it's likely
that I'm going to stop listening (again, yes this does seem to be
becoming a habit in its own right). I really can't think of any
storyline, with the possible exception of Jim trying to come to terms
with his abuse[1], which I'm interested in or want to hear.
It used to be my habit to listen in bed on a Sunday morning. Now I
actually get up sometime before 11am! This morning, I was expecting a
parcel delivery, so I was up and around to hear the delivery guy fail
to deliver either the parcel or the card to say I wasn't at home to
deliver the parcel.

Like all the other changes in my life in the last couple of years, not
listening to TA any more has definitely reduced my stress levels.
However much of a basket case I may be these days, I was a much more
stressed basket case before!
--
Fenny
Loading...