Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

postwarblue wrote:In Neill's day in the Army women were listed under sports gear.

anniexf wrote:

postwarblue wrote:In Neill's day in the Army women were listed under sports gear.

My brother-in-law worked in Boots pharmacy in Sixth form (early 70's) and as the only male in the store all the boys would wait until he was free and then sidle up to him to ask for condoms. The first time this happened he asked the (female) pharmacist where they were and she told him (very loudly) "in the drawer marked sports".

I seem to have upset Angela --- and others !

The purpose of my Post was to demonstrate that without the "Benefit" of Careers Advice, a person could still, and possibly, in spite of, the lack of such advice, be successful in life.

Now if I have upset anybody by being grateful for the results of this --- and being un-ashamed to say so --- Tough !

As far as I am aware, the Moderators have, up to now, imposed no rule which demands that Members of this Forum are required to read all the Posts, which appear.
It would appear that we can be selective.
The solution may well be, to avoid reading Posts which annoy you, or disagree, fundamentally, with your opinions.
This being the case, you may well feel better, although isolated, and restrict your input to intercourse with those of a like mind.
For myself, I shall continue to enjoy the contributions of Members, such as Spoonbill, with whom I disagree on almost every issue, and with whom I shall continue to debate, in insulting terms.
Should Spoonbill, or others, be of such a sensitive nature that they are distraught about this, I am sure that they may find consolation.

I remain un-repentant and NOTORIOUS------

It's just not Blue to boast about how wonderful you think you are.

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:The solution may well be, to avoid reading Posts which annoy you, or disagree, fundamentally, with your opinions.

Not a very practical proposal. How do you know that something's going to annoy you until you've read it?

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:Should Spoonbill, or others, be of such a sensitive nature that they are distraught abot this, I am sure that they may find consolation.

I remain un-repentant and NOTORIOUS------

I wouldn't describe anyone who has replied to you or commented upon your post as "sensitive" or "distraught". It's just that if you write things that could be construed as boastful, condescending or a tad sexist (at least to those whose attitudes have progressed beyond the 19th. Century) you're going to have to expect some reaction.

Anyway, back to the debate, "in insulting terms".......

Richard Ruck wrote:

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:Should Spoonbill, or others, be of such a sensitive nature that they are distraught abot this, I am sure that they may find consolation.

I remain un-repentant and NOTORIOUS------

I wouldn't describe anyone who has replied to you or commented upon your post as "sensitive" or "distraught". It's just that if you write things that could be construed as boastful, condescending or a tad sexist (at least to those whose attitudes have progressed beyond the 19th. Century) you're going to have to expect some reaction.

I couldn't make the clapping hands smiley to work (again!) but - nice one, Richard!

anniexf wrote:

Richard Ruck wrote:

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:Should Spoonbill, or others, be of such a sensitive nature that they are distraught abot this, I am sure that they may find consolation.

I remain un-repentant and NOTORIOUS------

I wouldn't describe anyone who has replied to you or commented upon your post as "sensitive" or "distraught". It's just that if you write things that could be construed as boastful, condescending or a tad sexist (at least to those whose attitudes have progressed beyond the 19th. Century) you're going to have to expect some reaction.

I couldn't make the clapping hands smiley to work (again!) but - nice one, Richard!

There appears to be a page error on the additional 'smileys'

I'll report to JT.

:deadhorse:

I have heard from JT, and YES, there is a current issue with the additional Smileys, which our Illustrious Leader is looking into.

AH WELL ! ---
I have tried to explain that I was not boasting ---but putting across the alternative "Career" without the "Benefit" of Guidance.

I seem to have failed -- djknow -- I don't care !

A somewhat different approach which, unfortunately, was not available when I was young. Define the final outcome and then decide what career will get you there.g

http://chforum.info/php/viewtopic.php?f ... 35#p108235

sejintenej wrote:A somewhat different approach which, unfortunately, was not available when I was young. Define the final outcome and then decide what career will get you there.g

http://chforum.info/php/viewtopic.php?f ... 35#p108235

True - but the school's survival, unless it becomes just another public school, is highly correlated with the affluence of OBs and their ability to provide funding.

It is surely in CH's interest to do everything they can to ensure the success of OBs. That includes education about career possibilities whether or not they go on to university.

I don't know what guidance CH provides today. The recent posts were specifically about Malone's disinterested attitude to his job and invariably negative advice. Hopefully things are more professional now.