Elite 11+ shopping and chat thread

Savvybuyer

wendyak wrote: »

Afternoon, of course we missed you ...just reading back so sorry if you have already done this to death and at the prospect of starting your over active brain off again, did you know the Justin Bieber song "love yourself" is not how he wrote it ......??
I heard a version he sang at a concert and you would have had spiky hair lol xxxx

Oh, I've just seen this as I've posted my post. And I now see that it relates to me. Yes, over-active brain again:rotfl::rotfl:.

(It's exactly right.)

I didn't know about the Justin Bieber song - I've never, to my knowledge, heard any version of it - although I am aware of the existence of Justin Bieber - all the songs these days, in pop music, sound the same to me and I can't tell any of them apart, except that unfortunately I don't like them. In fact, of course, you just saying "love yourself" and then mentioning it wasn't how he wrote it, you may as well be using the other word, that I think you mean from that, instead of using "love". I can now see the F word (sorry:o:rotfl:) - obviously not "the F word" but the actual word over the top of the word "love" where you've written it in your post. But it's not bothered me - as "love" has its innocent meaning. Sooner or later the word "love" will become a swearword:rotfl:.

There's no "spiky hair", if by that you mean "shocked", by the way as I'm absolutely fine with performers 'swearing' at concerts. ("Swearing" in quotes as it's nowadays so-called swearing really, it's not really "swearing" if it's not something that you don't say but is something that you do. By the way, I've now no idea as to what "swearing" is, since different people have different opinions. Obviously, I have an idea as to what might class as "swearing" and I know there are certain things that affect me in certain places - whether negatively or positively - but other than that - and obviously I wouldn't say any of them in a physical public space in which it wasn't around people I knew (even though I can't bring myself to do even that anyway), despite the fact that everyone I don't know is saying them to their friends in public whilst I'm present and able to overhear them (and I'm actually liking that:rotfl:). On the street fortunately, and not in front of the supermarket checkout lady, where I think, if someone were to do that (and they don't), it would make me uncomfortable.

But - apart from that - apart from looking at what is socially restricted and what you cannot say (not allowed to say) by society and trying to fathom exactly what that is, exactly which words are restricted and in what circumstances, which, when you look at it is a confounding task - and no logic as to why people say you don't say it in public and yet comedians in comedy performances in public places say it there don't they? - no logic to it at all - but then maybe I'm looking for logic and your society (and mine) is not built that way, for no apparent reason other than the (unsatisfactory) one to me of "it's the way things have long been done". Well, that's no reason:p:rotfl:. Not acceptable - I've rejected your reason as it does not have any logical foundation or any necessity for it to exist.

Yes, there are certain words that are restricted in certain circumstances and/or ones that may, in some places, produce a physical reaction in others of a negative nature (or discomfort etc.), doubtless because of early social conditioning and learned behaviour, and these words (just words for goodness sake - now, you know I really didn't want to say "goodness";)) may be called "swear words". (My favourite words as well these days, and the only ones that I like - in places in which they cause me no offence. All other words are neutral and I neither like nor dislike them. But the sounds of the swearing, in some circumstances where they do not make me feel uncomfortable, I really love them now and find them very friendly. I think strangers on the street should use them (as indeed they are when talking to their obvious friends) as it makes them sound friendly:rotfl:. Obviously, if something were shouted out at me aggressively (and not an "aggressive" performance by a rock musician on stage as part of a song, which would be even more enjoyable) - if someone were to approach me on the street and shout at me, aggressively, spitting out at me and towards me, when I didn't know whether they were about to physically assault me or I thought they might be about to do so, then the swearing would definitely not be "nice" at all there. However, really it should be the shouting and the knife being pulled out of their pocket that should be seriously condemned and not the words. The words only intensify and worsen that form of behaviour - fortunately I've never encountered it and I hope and trust I never do.)

So there are some words that are restricted, although working out which precise ones and in what circumstances is confounding, and make have physical impacts and be called "swearing". And I know there are some words that sometimes affect me, although not all words that anyone might consider to be "swearing" do so, so maybe they aren't swearing? I don't know, no idea anymore:rotfl::rotfl:. However, outside of the fact of socially restricted words clearly existing as a matter of fact, I don't even really think anything is a "swear word" these days and, provocatively, think that that idea exists purely in the minds of almost every other person in society and has no existence beyond their own opinion, so therefore the whole thing does not exist (it's an esoteric argument, argument = debate) and I'm now going to put the word "swearing" into quotation marks or refer to it as "so-called" swearing. In other words, to challenge the widely-held and almost virtually unquestioned assumption that it is.

We've had societies where the vast majority of people believed the earth was flat. That did not make it so. So, people's views that something is "swearing", in current society, make it that?

Yet of course I can't pretend that things have not made me uncomfortable related to said concept. Or rather not said:rotfl::rotfl:.

Really, speaking in a normal tone of voice, the whole thing is a !!!!!! concept and the sooner it is done away with, I think, the better. There you are you see - not everything that might be (and is) considered "swearing" will be stopped. So, some alleged "swearwords" on here whilst others are stopped. And ones considered more severe allowed whilst ones, notably the word for a butt, not. Totally illogical. Yet I think that's just the filter and the algorithm and not, so there isn't any deeper reason beyond that. Everyone knows that that word, that I occasionally use from time to time but not all the time, is my favourite one on this forum. And it's obviously because it gets through that it has been given that status for me. I'm not being immature (oh yes you are) - please stop misunderstanding me as being immature when I am not and I am not trying to be - and the deep irony of it all is that I, these days, find myself able to write the word yet I therefore use words (words:D) on this forum that I somehow convince myself that I can't say in actual life. So I actually write something on here that I can't even bring myself to say even when with friends. I can with some family, but not with friends even (despite everyone else... etc.).

And, for those that think that children might encounter this forum, all would be well as they would see the entire post and read and understand it (in their own way as everybody does) and therefore it's informing them that they can and they can't so all would be (and is) well and they would know that anyway. It's informing them - and it's not sexually explicit* so there is no reason to keep it from children of reading age. *Though maybe I should not even refer to that.

I think part of it is the Asperger's and the fact (if it is one) it is processed via my academic brain and thought about in advance and therefore just won't come out. However, it is not a "problem" (if it is one) - a problem of inability to swear?!?:think: - for one person with Asperger's as there are some non-Asperger's people that have problems with saying it too. Maybe tending to be more older generation and more female (sorry to be so sexist again!:D:rotfl:). But, no, words have been kept away from females in our society even more - because of, I argue, the "sexism" of society in that "boys will be boys" and swear whilst girls are pretty and cute and sweet and would never swear (despite the fact most of them do!) and it is perceived as "unladylike" by some people and it's therefore no coincidence that woman tend to find the words more offensive than men. I have no idea why it's, allegedly, not "ladylike" (as I don't see that anything is "like" women or is "like" men - obviously I'm picking out individual words literally again:rotfl:, but that's the way I operate - like a bloody computer than a human being:rotfl::rotfl: - no, that's a bit unfair as, clearly, I do have emotions) - I don't know why is allegedly not "ladylike", yet it cannot be denied that people perceive you differently, whether negatively or positively, just because, in some place or another, you "swear" and, in some places by some (or many?) people it is perceived as being "unprofessional" - I have no idea why or what the meaning of the word "unprofessional" is. Why is it unprofessional? I don't think it is - it's objectively neutral. Anyway...

It certainly affects the way (some) people perceive you - and maybe I've answered my question there as to why it's unprofessional. Ah, so it's other people's perception. Those pesky "other people" again:rotfl:. Clearly though, that song, with the sexually explicit (implicit?) content in the restaurant, it did make me react differently to how I would have done had it been "non-swearing" conversation.
Personally, though, I'd love a good woman who could swear - when it just me and her - and not if she made me uncomfortable in some public spaces - as (obviously not in a place where it would most likely make me uncomfortable) I like a woman that swears as well as men and find it rather appealing:rotfl:. I think women should be allowed to "swear" as much as men. Sexual equality:rotfl::rotfl:.

As for the Justin Bieber song, I've not heard any version - but of course I will one out now if it might have swearing:rotfl::rotfl:. I am immature. Adults should be allowed to right to be immature.

On the production of a version with the word "love", there are other songs like this. For example one by Notorious B.I.G. and R Kelly from ages back now, where there is a version called "Loving you tonight". However, even with that so-called clean version I would have problems if I were to hear it outside in some places. It's not the "love" parts - instead, elsewhere in the same song there are 'disguised' parts (that don't truly take away their meaning) and I've have problems with those. Literally, there needs to be absolutely nothing in 'disguised' or edited part at all for me to be able to play it with my father around. It's lessened because the "love" lyric is okay but, nearer the end of the "clean" version, it gets to these altered parts (I'm okay with replacement words like "love", as they have innocent meanings but not much else) and thus the entire song, even in "clean" edit, is unplayable for me (around other's company) or else I could play it but would have to stop it before it reached any of those "edited" parts.

So, they haven't even produced a fully clean version for me yet. Were they all replacement words, that would then be a clean version. As it is, still not appropriate (for all environments for me) - and sometimes just a single word renders a song inappropriate for some places. Sometimes, there are things that they still don't edit - some "milder" "swear words" - and still therefore wouldn't be usable, in current society, by a teacher in their classroom for example. Unless maybe they were discussing language as part of an English lesson. Possibly, possibly not. Who knows? Who knows what's okay:rotfl:.

In fact there is a song by Akon and Snoop Dogg where they've changed it to "love" (of course I also know the underlying meaning due to hearing the explicit version elsewhere, but that's okay in saying "love" as "love you" has an innocent meaning of "love you" and I'm therefore fine with that. I'm only hearing "love" and I can "pretend" that it only ever meant "love" or that people wouldn't know its real lyric and some people indeed wouldn't). However, there were other parts in the same radio version of this song, that were edits and implications and the sexually explicit meaning that came across from those, including specific things, caused me to feel extremely uncomfortable on every occasion the radio version was played out in my gym and I left the room, in serious discomfort and heart-racing, every time. So, I have even problems with that and the "clean" version hasn't resolved it. Given that it's still going on about a specific act, I don't even consider it to be "clean". The word "love" has been used - but the issue, my issue, is not with that but with other parts of the same radio song (that I don't think should be played on the radio at all when I'm in a public place).

I think, five years later, one of those edits that had made me uncomfortable turned out to be the word "weed" in the original. When I eventually, at home safety, heard the original version five years afterwards. The part in the "radio" version, which turned out not to be a swearword and would never have caused me any problem of offence had it been played on the radio as the word "weed" rather than the blank space (that wasn't quite blank at all), only added to the discomfort that the rest of the audible alterations in the song caused me at the gym. (I don't mean the "alterations" to "love" as they were fine.) So, the only thing that one edit caused was misunderstanding and offence again. And the rest was perfectly clear. (I think, when it's the word "weed", they seem to completely excise every element of the word from the soundtrack, so it comes across (almost deliberately?) as worse swearing, but, when it is the swearword, they will leave traces of part of the sound of the word around it and not completely blank it out at all. Then again, even if they do that (and I can't hear that they do as it does not sound like that), it still doesn't remove it at all.)

They make stupid, and unnecessary, changes as well, such as retitling a Black Eyed Peas song to "Don't Mess with my Heart". That's fine and the reworded version gives me no problem over the word "mess" - although I can't remember if they were other parts that probably caused me offence (there probably were). However, the original there was merely a word for a style of music, an innocent non-swearword that didn't need changing. And then, when a song contains actual swearing, they fail to reword that to something appropriate and instead alter it to an implication of the same thing or with the original word in signature sound form still in the soundtrack and cause me offence.

So, they change inoffensive things to other equally inoffensive things (but unnecessary to make such a change). And then they fail to remove offensive parts and instead continue to contain offensive material in the song or, sometimes, change to it material that is even more offensive than the unaltered original.

But, now, safely away at the moment from it -:rotfl::rotfl:.

bubbs

mhoc wrote: »

thanks for this

I was hoping not to face the mens section again as the last time it left me hot and sweaty and I really don't need to be even more hot and sweaty than I am now :rotfl:

OMG - the briefs I bought a week ago they have now reduced to £2.99 and OH has opened both packs
but I had a brain wave and ordered 4 £2.99 packs - sure theyre
the ones I still have my invoice from the first order

some good odds and ends suitable as gifts eg the hip flask shaped like a fish for an angler and a compass paper weight and lots of candles and biscuit tins

Thought of you when i saw them:rotfl:

josie_ann57

hornetgirl wrote: »

Linen dress and pinky white knees from me. Taken indoors - I'm not a sunbather and it's still roasting outside.

Love the dress ( nothing wrong with the knees either):)

bubbs

Savvy i thought i have just read this long post, but its a different one:rotfl::rotfl:

bubbs

tbw wrote: »

Do we know if this can be done again - I did one some time ago when they were first offering the bonus (must have been around a couple of years ago I think).

Ignore the above, I've found the answer in the very small print ! Can't do another one if you have ever switched an account with them.

Dont know i have not done it at all:eek:

bubbs

LEJC wrote: »

Short's no not from me sorry I can't compete with the lovely ladies...but guys where are yours...on second thoughts,maybe not!

Nor for me:eek: bloomin heck people would have a heart attack:rotfl::rotfl:
Hope your ok?

bubbs

wendyak wrote: »

Afternoon, of course we missed you ...just reading back so sorry if you have already done this to death and at the prospect of starting your over active brain off again, did you know the Justin Bieber song "love yourself" is not how he wrote it ......??
I heard a version he sang at a concert and you would have had spiky hair lol xxxx

How is your back?

Nannylala wrote: »

Good afternoon ..just back from the dining club ..no dinner to cook tonight :T and popped in quickly to see lots of lovely legs :Areminded me of when the boys did their boxer shorts calendar ...feels a little cooler today as a bit of a breeze which is very welcome ...take care peeps and drink plenty ...hot drinks are good so have put the kettle on :coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee:

Nanny hope your feet have gone down x

diluvsdiscounts wrote: »

Sorry :D:cool:

You look it:p:rotfl::rotfl: Soon be on your jollies wont you?

bubbs

tweets hope you had a nice first day of holidays?

hornetgirl

josie_ann57 wrote: »

Love the dress ( nothing wrong with the knees either):)

Thank you - can't beat an eBay bargain :cool: (dress, not knees )

TrulyMadly

What a great game westie:T:T

Sorry I missed my shorts off the pic:D