• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gilf

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,740 profile views
  1. Legally it's not quite so black and white (see section (c) further down)... I assume he was convicted based on Section 76 (2) (a)the defendant intentionally deceived the complainant as to the nature or purpose of the relevant act; Section 75 details various scenarios where consent may not explicitly be given, but not sure they would be relevant here. As a man you can't legally be raped by a woman. So same goes for those talking about not taking the pill, it would need to be under the other areas of Sexual Offences act and I'm not sure there is enough in there to charge somebody. Rape (1) A person (A) commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
  2. Was just about to say the same, I've never understood that as an argument for the fact a man walked on the moon. Not saying they were faked, just that in that regard it's a rather weak argument.
  3. As already said its the way you look at it and if anything if you think it's racist then that actually means you are a racist in that you are making the assumption it's black people are stealing them. The only variable used in the decision to do this would be that they are stolen more often, it would be the very pinnacle of not racist, based on pure data only and a data set which has no information on the colour of the person taking it at all.
  4. Having skim read it it's all the usual bollocks as far as I can see, just strung out for 12 weeks. None of it in isolation is bad advice, but it's not been bad advice for 30+ years, yet people are still obese. So clearly it's either wrong*, or it's not getting presented in the correct way. * I'd say it's a good blue print for how to live your life... an inadequate one for somebody trying to lose a significant amount.
  5. Sorry was away for the weekend. It's something which is difficult to answer, on the surface I could say I fasted a lot, massively reduced calories, changed the macro nutrient balance and walked about 10 miles a day. Those were possibly the actual mechanics of it, but the reality of it is that they were just that, the mechanical processes.The mental effort, life changing effect during the process and sheer time involved is why I said previously that I don't think most people can realistically do it. This consumed (pardon the pun) for 2 years, destroyed my marriage and other far reaching effects. The thing here is I'm talking about morbid obesity, if you have put on a few pounds, even a couple of stone then eating less and moving more will be enough. Still takes effort but easier to deal with mentally. The key thing is to find something you can do, that works shorter terms and is sustainable... that is relatively easy for mild weight lose, not so much when it's going to take 2+ years and I'm not talking OK for the most part with the odd cream bun, I'm talking full on eating plan, no deviation. Sorry that's not an answer, but it sort of is to the extent that somebody would need to find out for themselves, there is no on one method works for all and that again loops back to the idea the NHS can't just print a leaflet. My personal experience with the NHS on the issue was shockingly poor and basically amounted to an offer of coming in every few weeks and having the nurse weigh me.
  6. Research is beginning to show that a lack of sleep is a massive factor in loads of health issue, weight being a significant one.
  7. I'm not sure there is one single thing, but finding a method that suits you has to be the key ingredient. There is no doubt it's a calories in and calories out equation, but that's like telling a drug addict it's a drugs or no drugs equation. You need a frame work that you can fit that equation in to. I genuinely believe that it's beyond most people, especially for people who are morbidly obese. It takes an incredible amount of mental effort. I think this is a classic mistake in understanding why people are obese... people are thinking it's a choice issue*, where as it's more likely a situation issue. * anything I say in this thread is not a justification, people are totally responsible for their weight.
  8. My main issue was going from a very manual job to a combination of sitting in an office, high stress and drinking about the same, four times a week. I suspect that's how a lot of people get in to that situation, the don't feel like they are eating a lot or to excess, but drinking ads on a ton of calories and messes with your metabolic processes in the short term.
  9. I've been morbidly obese in the past. To be honest it's a multi prong problem, but @Libspero nails the main problem, dieting is hard, when you are obese it's about 10 times worse because your body is fighting millions of years worth of evolution. The biggest issue is that the medical, media, diet and fitness industry (outside of some very specialist clinics) haven't got a clue how to advise or help obese people, in fact most of the advice makes the issue worse. Obese people are incorrectly told how to lose weight, this is unsustainably, this causes them to fail, destroys their self worth and leads them to their only comfort, the very thing that's killing them, food. The success rate for diets is around 5-10% in the longer term, it's not just a mental/control issue, you body is literally fighting to stay fat. I'm not saying that it's not possible to lose weight and keep it off, but dropping a few pounds to get you back on track is entirely different to significant weight lose. @JoeDavola is also correct, obese people know they are obese, they have to live with it every second of the day. I've talked mostly about being obese, but getting there in the first place, the very issue there is that it's a gradual process. Of course you don't wake up one day and all of a sudden you are obese, but you do one day wake up and realise you are obese, that's a subtle but massive difference in terms of consequence.
  10. We have already seen it... 2017 they got given the benefit of the doubt, fucked up the negotiations and we ended up not leaving before the EU elections, both the Tories AND Labour were totally slaughtered in those, I think that's a clear indication that they are not pulling the wool over the eyes of the general public.
  11. From the article : Errr... they have endorsed no-deal. The explicitly voted invoke article 50 which clearly states after a 2 years period you are out, deal or no deal.
  12. I doubt I share many political positions with your average UKIP or BrexitParty voter, but like you say both have become a rally point for the leave voter. You just need to look at the success of the Brexit party in such a short space of time for proof of it. While I agree we might not see people taking up arms and going out on the streets you need to recognise the fact we even had a referendum on the issue at all was due to the pressure applied by support for the idea of leave.
  13. Because in a bizzare twist of fate Gina Miller has killed any notion that you can hold any referendum and get a definitive result.. Any deal negotiated, anything put to public vote has to be voted on in parliament, so if you do hold a second referendum it can still be blocked in parliament.
  14. You maybe right... but I think the world has moved on. I'm not sure it will be seen in the same light as it might have been in the past.
  15. Was about to say exactly the same thing, been thinking it for weeks. Making my blood boil that the natural reaction to a break down of a political process is blowing people up.