John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'.

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:51 pm

Ye Gods....where will it end? Rolling Eyes

Not only are John Lewis incredibly overpriced in many of their departments, they are now ridiculously over pc.

"John Lewis has become the first major UK store to remove “boys” and “girls” labels from children’s clothing in a bid to reduce “gender stereotypes".

The retailer has sections of stores and introduced “gender neutral” pieces.

Campaign groups and some parents have praised the shop for leading the way in gender neutral clothing, but some critics have accused it of taking political correctness too far"

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/john-lewis-scraps-boys-and-girls-labels-on-childrens-clothes-to-reduce-gender-stereotypes-a3625491.html

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 1:07 pm

"Rejoice! John Lewis no longer sell sexist clothing as boy & girl labels removed. Gender neutrality is the future!"

This is a remark in support of John Lewis's decision to stop marking kids clothes with labels. Rolling Eyes

by Miffs2 Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:52 pm

Syl wrote:"Rejoice! John Lewis no longer sell sexist clothing as boy & girl labels removed. Gender neutrality is the future!"

This is a remark in support of John Lewis's decision to stop marking kids clothes with labels.

This is galloping towards farce!

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:06 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Syl wrote:"Rejoice! John Lewis no longer sell sexist clothing as boy & girl labels removed. Gender neutrality is the future!"

This is a remark in support of John Lewis's decision to stop marking kids clothes with labels.

This is galloping towards farce!

It is...its laughable.
I would boycott John Lewis....that's if I ever shopped there in the first place, which I don't. Evil or Very Mad

by Miffs2 Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:15 pm

Syl wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:

This is galloping towards farce!

It is...its laughable.
I would boycott John Lewis....that's if I ever shopped there in the first place, which I don't.

I don't go in John Lewis either. I'm more. TJ Hughes girl!

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:18 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Syl wrote:

It is...its laughable.
I would boycott John Lewis....that's if I ever shopped there in the first place, which I don't.

I don't go in John Lewis either. I'm more. TJ Hughes girl!

I LOVE TJ Hughes....its the first place I go to when we shop in Bury....why pay £60 for Gatineau creams when you can get them there for a tenner?? Laughing

by Miffs2 Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:22 pm

Syl wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:

I don't go in John Lewis either. I'm more. TJ Hughes girl!

I LOVE TJ Hughes....its the first place I go to when we shop in Bury....why pay £60 for Gatineau creams when you can get them there for a tenner??

Exactly!

by eddie Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:34 pm

Hmmm. I don't mind that they're doing this, doesn't bother me, but will they still sell pink clothes for girls, for example? Cos I don't much like bland beiges and pastels on children and that's what their clothing line is; insipid, washed-out looking colours.

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:00 pm

eddie wrote:Hmmm. I don't mind that they're doing this, doesn't bother me, but will they still sell pink clothes for girls, for example? Cos I don't much like bland beiges and pastels on children and that's what their clothing line is; insipid, washed-out looking colours.

"The store will still sell pink and blue items, but a new range of clothing has been introduced and designed to be worn by both boys and girls."

by 'Wolfie Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:35 pm

Chairman Mao will be smiling down upon those good comrades, with their new boring beige asexual clothing...

by eddie Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:11 pm

Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:Hmmm. I don't mind that they're doing this, doesn't bother me, but will they still sell pink clothes for girls, for example? Cos I don't much like bland beiges and pastels on children and that's what their clothing line is; insipid, washed-out looking colours.

"The store will still sell pink and blue items, but a new range of clothing has been introduced and designed to be worn by both boys and girls."

Ah well. Then I don't care much then either way and I'm not keen on John Lewis anyway, they're a little fogey for my tastes.

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:49 pm

Well I hope they are not setting a precedent that other shops will follow.
Its a ridiculous idea, they are insinuating something is wrong in advertising clothes for girls and clothes for boys.
There has always been unisex clothes anyway...something for everyone without pandering to overt pc ness.

by eddie Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:41 pm

I am guessing soon everyone will follow. I don't mind, it doesn't bother me really. I'm sure at some point I've probably dressed one of mine in something that wasn't overtly a girl or boy colour.

by Syl Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:48 pm

eddie wrote:I am guessing soon everyone will follow. I don't mind, it doesn't bother me really. I'm sure at some point I've probably dressed one of mine in something that wasn't overtly a girl or boy colour.

Well me too...my son loved pink so he had a couple of little polo shirts in pink.
But to stop labelling clothes because its sexist and bad in some way is imo ridiculous.

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:41 am

but what makes a shirt 'for girls' or 'for boys'
unless it's fitted it is gender neutral so shouldn't be labelled 'for girls' just because it is pink etc.

I think this is a good move, it's not about stopping the pink and blue shirts. it is about stopping the bullshit that one is for girls and one if for boys.

by Syl Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:37 am

veya_victaous wrote:but what makes a shirt 'for girls' or 'for boys'
unless it's fitted it is gender neutral so shouldn't be labelled 'for girls' just because it is pink etc.

I think this is a good move, it's not about stopping the pink and blue shirts. it is about stopping the bullshit that one is for girls and one if for boys.

Some clothes for kids and for adults are unisex, T shirts and polo shirts for eg, I don't think the colours matter, anyone can wear what colour they like, I don't think blue for boys and pink for girls has much meaning now.
Other items....blouses, skirts, etc are obviously for girls....so why not label them?
Jackets and trousers fasten on the right for lads...always have done, plus the fit is different.

This move isn't for practical purposes, its a skewed idea focusing on the sexuality of children....which only exists in the minds of the pc driven idiots who have thought of it.
If a child is gender confused they will know damn well which clothes they feel comfortable in....so head to the unisex rails till they are old enough to make decisions. Rolling Eyes

by Raggamuffin Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:57 am

I didn't know they had signs like that anyway. I would have thought that nobody would need such signs. Laughing

It probably saves money to scrap labels saying something is for girls or boys. A skirt wouldn't really need a label anyway would it?

by magica Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:40 pm

Stupid idea, what the hell is going on, they're all going overboard.

I don't shop in John Lewis, just as well really.

by veya_victaous Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:22 am

Syl wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:but what makes a shirt 'for girls' or 'for boys'
unless it's fitted it is gender neutral so shouldn't be labelled 'for girls' just because it is pink etc.

I think this is a good move, it's not about stopping the pink and blue shirts. it is about stopping the bullshit that one is for girls and one if for boys.

Some clothes for kids and for adults are unisex, T shirts and polo shirts for eg, I don't think the colours matter, anyone can wear what colour they like, I don't think blue for boys and pink for girls has much meaning now.
Other items....blouses, skirts, etc are obviously for girls....so why not label them?
Jackets and trousers fasten on the right for lads...always have done, plus the fit is different.

This move isn't for practical purposes, its a skewed idea focusing on the sexuality of children....which only exists in the minds of the pc driven idiots who have thought of it.
If a child is gender confused they will know damn well which clothes they feel comfortable in....so head to the unisex rails till they are old enough to make decisions.

why are skirts obviously for girls?

and the fastening thing is silly, and highlights why society needs to change.

there is not actually any reason for the clothes to be gendered other than 'tradition'

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:45 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Syl wrote:

Some clothes for kids and for adults are unisex, T shirts and polo shirts for eg, I don't think the colours matter, anyone can wear what colour they like, I don't think blue for boys and pink for girls has much meaning now.
Other items....blouses, skirts, etc are obviously for girls....so why not label them?
Jackets and trousers fasten on the right for lads...always have done, plus the fit is different.

This move isn't for practical purposes, its a skewed idea focusing on the sexuality of children....which only exists in the minds of the pc driven idiots who have thought of it.
If a child is gender confused they will know damn well which clothes they feel comfortable in....so head to the unisex rails till they are old enough to make decisions.

why are skirts obviously for girls?

and the fastening thing is silly, and highlights why society needs to change.

there is not actually any reason for the clothes to be gendered other than 'tradition'

Somehow, I don't think that I could cope with seeing you in a slit skirt, thigh length boots, fishnets and a suspender belt......

by eddie Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:08 am

On the other hand Fred....I reckon you could look quite dapper. Cool

by Syl Tue Sep 05, 2017 1:02 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Syl wrote:

Some clothes for kids and for adults are unisex, T shirts and polo shirts for eg, I don't think the colours matter, anyone can wear what colour they like, I don't think blue for boys and pink for girls has much meaning now.
Other items....blouses, skirts, etc are obviously for girls....so why not label them?
Jackets and trousers fasten on the right for lads...always have done, plus the fit is different.

This move isn't for practical purposes, its a skewed idea focusing on the sexuality of children....which only exists in the minds of the pc driven idiots who have thought of it.
If a child is gender confused they will know damn well which clothes they feel comfortable in....so head to the unisex rails till they are old enough to make decisions.

why are skirts obviously for girls?

and the fastening thing is silly, and highlights why society needs to change.

there is not actually any reason for the clothes to be gendered other than 'tradition'

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female. Shocked

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:33 pm

eddie wrote:On the other hand Fred....I reckon you could look quite dapper.

Well, I might...if I'm allowed to keep my moustache!

I have to confess that many years ago, for a bet, I went to a Vicars and Tarts party...as a tart...

...and guess who the friggin' police stopped for speeding in the early hours of the morning!

by eddie Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:37 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
eddie wrote:On the other hand Fred....I reckon you could look quite dapper.

Well, I might...if I'm allowed to keep my moustache!

I have to confess that many years ago, for a bet, I went to a Vicars and Tarts party...as a tart...

...and guess who the friggin' police stopped for speeding in the early hours of the morning!

Hahahahaha oh how I wish there were mugshots of you dressed as a tart......now that, would make my day!

by magica Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:53 pm

Syl wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

why are skirts obviously for girls?

and the fastening thing is silly, and highlights why society needs to change.

there is not actually any reason for the clothes to be gendered other than 'tradition'

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female.

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

I totally agree with all you said, so gave you a greeny! cheers

by Syl Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:23 pm

magica wrote:
Syl wrote:

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female.

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

I totally agree with all you said, so gave you a greeny!

Why thank you Miss Mags. John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. 2385359624

by magica Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:10 pm

That's a first lately Laughing

by Syl Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:23 pm

magica wrote:That's a first lately

That's cos you never give me a greenie...even when I am brilliant. Razz

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:44 pm

eddie wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Well, I might...if I'm allowed to keep my moustache!

I have to confess that many years ago, for a bet, I went to a Vicars and Tarts party...as a tart...

...and guess who the friggin' police stopped for speeding in the early hours of the morning!

Hahahahaha oh how I wish there were mugshots of you dressed as a tart......now that, would make my day!

It is not the publication of mugshots that would worry me!

In any case, I used my influence with the Home Office to have them made subject to a D-Notice...

by veya_victaous Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:08 am

Syl wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Syl wrote:

Some clothes for kids and for adults are unisex, T shirts and polo shirts for eg, I don't think the colours matter, anyone can wear what colour they like, I don't think blue for boys and pink for girls has much meaning now.
Other items....blouses, skirts, etc are obviously for girls....so why not label them?
Jackets and trousers fasten on the right for lads...always have done, plus the fit is different.

This move isn't for practical purposes, its a skewed idea focusing on the sexuality of children....which only exists in the minds of the pc driven idiots who have thought of it.
If a child is gender confused they will know damn well which clothes they feel comfortable in....so head to the unisex rails till they are old enough to make decisions.

why are skirts obviously for girls?

and the fastening thing is silly, and highlights why society needs to change.

there is not actually any reason for the clothes to be gendered other than 'tradition'

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female.

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

still doesn't explain why skirts are for girls. Cool

And that is why the 'Blah blah tradition crap' argument is crap
there is no logic or reason for skirts to be for girls, just some bullshit someone brain farted into existence probably while pissed out of their skull as is 'tradition'

There are already gender neutral names, like alex and chris and kris. I know they used to be shortenings of gendered names but are increasingly the Name on birth certificates

I would also point out children DO NOT need guidance from the bad old days. like when you and HT talk about being kids, Terrible to think society was every so sexist and uncivil. tongue

by nicko Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:41 am

Bet you'd look lovely in a Skirt, short, fat hairy legs, or chalk White like two pipe cleaners hanging out of drainpipes Laughing

by Syl Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:13 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Syl wrote:

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female.

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

still doesn't explain why skirts are for girls.

And that is why the 'Blah blah tradition crap' argument is crap
there is no logic or reason for skirts to be for girls, just some bullshit someone brain farted into existence probably while pissed out of their skull as is 'tradition'

There are already gender neutral names, like alex and chris and kris. I know they used to be shortenings of gendered names but are increasingly the Name on birth certificates

I would also point out children DO NOT need guidance from the bad old days. like when you and HT talk about being kids, Terrible to think society was every so sexist and uncivil.

Ahh yes, the bad old days, where kids were happy being free, playing out, mixing with other human beings instead of living their lives in an interactive world with no human contact outside of school.

Don't knock the 60's and 70's...we were having a ball, we gave you lot good music, good attitudes, and a firm foundation that gave you the confidence to believe (wrongly, but you will learn) that you know everything about everything. tongue

When/if you ever have kids, call your son Shiela and sent him to school in a rara skirt....you will soon learn why boys have a dress code different to girls. lol!

by HoratioTarr Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:15 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Syl wrote:

You wear what you want, you are an adult.
Children need guidance, and most boys are guided into boys clothes and girls into girls clothes....it makes sense and gives a child an identity, because SHOCK HORROR......some babies are born male....and some female.

What next....Gender neutral names?

All this gender neutral crap is coming from the minds of the adults not the children.......its their hang ups that will cause the youngsters confusion.....kids are quite happy actually knowing which sex they are and what's is appropriate for them to wear.
The very very small minority who are confused will need individual care.....merging clothes labels for all would be the least of their problems.

still doesn't explain why skirts are for girls.

And that is why the 'Blah blah tradition crap' argument is crap
there is no logic or reason for skirts to be for girls, just some bullshit someone brain farted into existence probably while pissed out of their skull as is 'tradition'

There are already gender neutral names, like alex and chris and kris. I know they used to be shortenings of gendered names but are increasingly the Name on birth certificates

I would also point out children DO NOT need guidance from the bad old days. like when you and HT talk about being kids, Terrible to think society was every so sexist and uncivil.

I have some great childhood memories... don't you? I don't think there's anything wrong with having a childhood that involved playing out, freedom to explore, no knowledge of being gender neutral/racist/homophobic/, or worrying about what we ate or how thin/fat we were.

As for why girls wear skirts, I think you'll find it goes way back in history where pants were primarily used to enable riding. Women in China, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India have been wearing pants for centuries. Throughout history men haven't always worn pants either. Greeks believed that only barbarians wore pants, the Hindus believed stitched cloth was impure. So they only wore draped garments.

Skirts probably enabled women to attend to bodily matters more easily. I read somewhere that it also helped prevent thrush if the nether regions had the air circulation afforded by skirts. This was due more to the nature of the fabrics used for clothing in colder climes and at a time when people didn't bathe themselves as often. And it would mean that menstruation was easier to control if skirts were worn. As the years progressed skirts for girls just remained a tradition. I think you'll find that most things we find useless these days have their roots in practicalities. Ask yourself why women's clothing traditionally buttons from the left and men from the right?

How many men/boys do you think would be happy wearing a skirt or dress? Yet, women are quite happy to wear pants? Seems to me that banning skirts isn't really being gender neutral, is it? More like gender biased.

by HoratioTarr Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:18 pm

Syl wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

still doesn't explain why skirts are for girls.

And that is why the 'Blah blah tradition crap' argument is crap
there is no logic or reason for skirts to be for girls, just some bullshit someone brain farted into existence probably while pissed out of their skull as is 'tradition'

There are already gender neutral names, like alex and chris and kris. I know they used to be shortenings of gendered names but are increasingly the Name on birth certificates

I would also point out children DO NOT need guidance from the bad old days. like when you and HT talk about being kids, Terrible to think society was every so sexist and uncivil.

Ahh yes, the bad old days, where kids were happy being free, playing out, mixing with other human beings instead of living their lives in an interactive world with no human contact outside of school.

Don't knock the 60's and 70's...we were having a ball, we gave you lot good music, good attitudes, and a firm foundation that gave you the confidence to believe (wrongly, but you will learn) that you know everything about everything.

When/if you ever have kids, call your son Shiela and sent him to school in a rara skirt....you will soon learn why boys have a dress code different to girls.

Most women love wearing dresses and skirts. It should be all about choices, not dictated by what some Call Me Mike thinks children shouldn't wear.

by veya_victaous Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:17 am

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

still doesn't explain why skirts are for girls.

And that is why the 'Blah blah tradition crap' argument is crap
there is no logic or reason for skirts to be for girls, just some bullshit someone brain farted into existence probably while pissed out of their skull as is 'tradition'

There are already gender neutral names, like alex and chris and kris. I know they used to be shortenings of gendered names but are increasingly the Name on birth certificates

I would also point out children DO NOT need guidance from the bad old days. like when you and HT talk about being kids, Terrible to think society was every so sexist and uncivil.

Ahh yes, the bad old days, where kids were happy being free, playing out, mixing with other human beings instead of living their lives in an interactive world with no human contact outside of school.

Don't knock the 60's and 70's...we were having a ball, we gave you lot good music, good attitudes, and a firm foundation that gave you the confidence to believe (wrongly, but you will learn) that you know everything about everything.

When/if you ever have kids, call your son Shiela and sent him to school in a rara skirt....you will soon learn why boys have a dress code different to girls.

Most women love wearing dresses and skirts. It should be all about choices, not dictated by what some Call Me Mike thinks children shouldn't wear.

which is right.
ALL the clothes should be laid out and LET THE KID CHOSE
and don't try and force their choice with 'guidance' that is really just 'oldies preference cause it's what they were forced to wear' by saying this is girls or boys clothes.
let them pick up what they want.

It really isn't about those with gender identity issues it is about the average boy accepting the other average boy in a skirt. which they would if they weren't corrupted by adults preconception about gender specifying clothes.

by 'Wolfie Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:59 am

People should also look back at the history of clothing...

"Skirts", tunics, robes and togas were already unisex clothing, up to only a couple of hundred years ago -- what is often considered "traditional" and "proper" clothing choices only dates back to the 19th century..

Trousers were originally female specific garb -- and were adopted/adapted by their good menfolk a couple of thousand years ago, specifically because they were found to be more suitable for horseriding.

Even around the world today, over 70% on men (mainly across Africa, Asia, South America and Pacific Islands..) have 'skirt' type garments as part of their regular clothing choices..
Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Plato, Aristotle --all those dudes wore tunics, robes, sandals... John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. 2108625937

John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. 2108625937

by eddie Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:30 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

People should also look back at the history of clothing...

"Skirts", tunics, robes and togas were already unisex clothing, up to only a couple of hundred years ago -- what is often considered "traditional" and "proper" clothing choices only dates back to the 19th century..

Trousers were originally female specific garb -- and were adopted/adapted by their good menfolk a couple of thousand years ago, specifically because they were found to be more suitable for horseriding.

Even around the world today, over 70% on men (mainly across Africa, Asia, South America and Pacific Islands..) have 'skirt' type garments as part of their regular clothing choices..
Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Plato, Aristotle --all those dudes wore tunics, robes, sandals...

Those are all actually very valid points to be fair.

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:51 pm

Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:I am guessing soon everyone will follow. I don't mind, it doesn't bother me really. I'm sure at some point I've probably dressed one of mine in something that wasn't overtly a girl or boy colour.

Well me too...my son loved pink so he had a couple of little polo shirts in pink.
But to stop labelling clothes because its sexist and bad in some way is imo ridiculous.

Pink used to be a colour for boys clothing, years ago...!

by Fred Moletrousers Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:17 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Syl wrote:

Well me too...my son loved pink so he had a couple of little polo shirts in pink.
But to stop labelling clothes because its sexist and bad in some way is imo ridiculous.

Pink used to be a colour for boys clothing, years ago...!

Historically, I'm Brigante, old boy, and the Romans were shit scared of us...until they realised that we went into battle wearing pink furry codpieces.

by Syl Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:47 pm

I like a man in a pink shirt...especially if he has a tan. John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. 701223944

by eddie Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:11 pm

Syl wrote:I like a man in a pink shirt...especially if he has a tan.

Why does that make me also think of a hairy chest, medallion and a cheesy white set of dentures?

by Syl Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:19 pm

eddie wrote:
Syl wrote:I like a man in a pink shirt...especially if he has a tan.

Why does that make me also think of a hairy chest, medallion and a cheesy white set of dentures?

Have you been peeking in my fantasy photo album??

John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRduvzLZlGDAg4ar0k1N4jcvYS2Kjq1QJYV_b5cvtTkQ0QEobxG

John Lewis scraps labels and signs that specify 'Boys' or 'Girls'. Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRduvzLZlGDAg4ar0k1N4jcvYS2Kjq1QJYV_b5cvtTkQ0QEobxG

by eddie Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:20 pm

Love your avatar btw. You look stunning.

by Syl Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:28 pm

Thanks...I'm the one on the left. Razz

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:01 pm

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:11 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Pink used to be a colour for boys clothing, years ago...!

Historically, I'm Brigante, old boy, and the Romans were shit scared of us...until they realised that we went into battle wearing pink furry codpieces.

by eddie Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:21 pm

Syl wrote:Thanks...I'm the one on the left.

That's actually a really bad Elvis lookalike. They've got you down to a tee but Elvis, not so much.

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:35 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Pink used to be a colour for boys clothing, years ago...!

Historically, I'm Brigante, old boy, and the Romans were shit scared of us...until they realised that we went into battle wearing pink furry codpieces.

Watch from 5min30sec in...

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:53 pm

Why can't they just keep with boys/girls sections but stock these so called 'gender neutral' items in both sections...!?

Another thing... I saw a bit of the (I think it is) Victoria Derbyshire 'news' programme earlier... where there was as stupid bitch with blue hair sitting there complaining how she felt offended by a toilet attendant in a london train station after he asked her what the fuck she thought she was doing walking into the gents toilets...

She was saying that it should be perfectly ok for her to do this because 'she self identified her gender as being male'...!!!

WTF!!!

But then went in for a sit down piss in a cubicle, straight out of her vagina!!!

As a bloke... I do not want to be standing there with my dick out and having a piss, and have to put up with women walking in...!!!

This blue haired twat had tits and a fanny... I dont give a fuck what twisted shit she had going on upstairs in her tiny mind... she should keep the fuk out of the gents... just like men should keep the fuk out of the ladies toilets!!!

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:02 am

eddie wrote:
Syl wrote:I like a man in a pink shirt...especially if he has a tan.

Why does that make me also think of a hairy chest, medallion and a cheesy white set of dentures?

because you're a weirdo eddie, simple as that

my hubby used to look bloody gorge in a pink shirt

he had dark skin and dark eyes and very defined muscles

just thought i'd share that one

Embarassed

by Sponsored content