you can make perfectly serviceable shoes for free by tying bits of old tyre to your feet. yet for some reason, people insist on buying them instead.
Why the Guardian is going down the pan!
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
Elpenor
a clown’s heart and a mandolin
My last wallet was acquired by my ex, it was given away as a freebie by a bank whose conference she went to (JPMC I think) so I must have had it about 4 years or so. It seems good quality, brown leather so will probably keep me going for a good few years. No idea how much one would cost normally
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
The Lakeland one is made in UK too - or site says 95% of their products are. I'd have thought the process would be largely automated so hard to say what % of price goes on wages.
As strung out remarks though, nothing really special. It would have been good if the Guardian had included this sort of stuff in the 'article' which unless I'm missing something has just a photo of the outside and link to the manufacturer's site. Cheap way for them to fill space and attract advertisers.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Help me, Urbanites. Which one do you think I should go for? Recycled Anya Hindmarsh £125, Lowe £175, Paul Smith £125, Merlot £90, Aspers £70 or the budget option at £34?
Play your cards: 12 stylish card holders for contactless payments – in pictures
Tap and go with a sleek card holder in punchy red or shiny silver pineapple leatherwww.theguardian.com
This is £8.59.
If it was made in the UK, it would say it was made in the UK in the product description. Also, it's minging.
You can buy stamps for as little as 65p each, but apparently some people pay hundreds - sometimes thousands - of pounds for stamps that they think look nicer.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
If it was good enough for Imperial Japanese Army holdouts on remote Pacific Islands then it should be good enough for you, Mr Dandy Dan Smarty Pants
It’s almost like there is a middle ground between £10 and £70.
Yeah, it's about £35
So you are persisting with the view that the range of prices presented in the article, with its one sole option under £70 (at the bargain price of £34), represents the readership’s actual normal spending range rather than it being, in truth, a piece of aspirational consumerism designed to sow dissatisfaction in readers for the purpose of encouraging further consumption?
are we reading the same article? there's three wallets under £40, and another at £49?
I’m going by the summary originally posted, which listed six wallets, only one of which was under £70. I guess we’re talking at cross-purposes if that isn’t representative of the article itself.
oryx
Sitting on the bok of the day
It's entry-level luxury goods consumption.
It's the slippery slope to £2,000 plus handbags being on sale (and people buying them) when people are going to foodbanks and scared shitless over the £20 reduction in universal credit.
Both are seen as completely acceptable by the majority of people (not on here where people are generally more aware/questioning/compassionate, but U75 isn't representative).
It's the slippery slope to £2,000 plus handbags being on sale (and people buying them) when people are going to foodbanks and scared shitless over the £20 reduction in universal credit.
Both are seen as completely acceptable by the majority of people (not on here where people are generally more aware/questioning/compassionate, but U75 isn't representative).
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
It is actually very similar to the one I use myself. Yes, I appreciate that there are more aesthetically pleasing designs, but it does the job.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
This is possibly one of the weirdest takes I’ve ever seen the Guardian have on a subject.
So South Australia are currently trialling an app that they hope to roll out across the state to enforce lockdowns. The app combines facial recognition and geolocation technology.
The government will randomly contact users to demand their location. Users will have 15 minutes to respond with a photo of them self to prove they are where they should be. If they fail to respond they will get a phone call, and if they do not have a sufficient excuse they will get a visit from a friendly police officer.
So what do the Guardian say? Well they’ve reported on it and not denied anything about it. But they did however mention, quite randomly and with no apparent reason, that Fox News doesn’t like the idea! I guess that means I should approve of the app.
Thanks for that, Guardian
So South Australia are currently trialling an app that they hope to roll out across the state to enforce lockdowns. The app combines facial recognition and geolocation technology.
The government will randomly contact users to demand their location. Users will have 15 minutes to respond with a photo of them self to prove they are where they should be. If they fail to respond they will get a phone call, and if they do not have a sufficient excuse they will get a visit from a friendly police officer.
So what do the Guardian say? Well they’ve reported on it and not denied anything about it. But they did however mention, quite randomly and with no apparent reason, that Fox News doesn’t like the idea! I guess that means I should approve of the app.
Thanks for that, Guardian
they also printed this article yesterday: Why the industry should heed China’s crackdown on video game players
I wouldn't disagree that some commercial mechanics in the video game world are reprehensible, but the tone of this piece is all over the place.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
What I like about this comparison is how it rests on the well-established fact that good quality cardholders are as important for a person's quality of life as functional shoes, so it isn't fatuous at all.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
They printed an excellent interview with Judith Butler, by Jules Gleeson, this morning.
www.theguardian.com
But this evening they decide that they needed to 'reflect developments which occurred after the interview took place' and removed several paragraphs. What developments had occurred? It would seem some people objected to her characterisations of terfs. And i thought it was the terfs who were meant to be cancelled.
The omitted paragraphs were:
Judith Butler: ‘We need to rethink the category of woman’
The author of the ground-breaking book Gender Trouble says we should not be surprised when the category of women expands to include trans women
The omitted paragraphs were:
Last edited:
You have omitted the following paragraph (also deleted from the article) which should also appear before the ones you have quoted. This paragraph is the question the journalist is asking (the other paragraphs is Butler's response):
"...It seems that some within feminist movements are becoming sympathetic to these far-right campaigns. This year’s furore around Wi Spa in Los Angeles saw an online outrage by transphobes followed by bloody protests organised by the Proud Boys. Can we expect this alliance to continue?"
Diffchecker
You are probably aware of the Wi Spa incident
Person charged with indecent exposure at LA spa after viral Instagram video
The 'transphobes' were objecting to a male hanging out in the women's changing area. Turns out this male was a convicted serial sex offender.
I guess this didn't fit the narrative, so it was deleted to make Butler's comments about 'terfs' look less derranged.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
The bigots st the spa claimed the interloper was trans. There is zero evidence this person is/was trans. And the bigots (your bigots) did then side with the proud boy scum. That’s whose side you’re on.
if you disagree, write a letter isn’t that what you do best?
tldr - terfs are scum
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Not an expert on this incident but a trans woman with a record was arrested for it: Wi Spa controversy - Wikipedia
Surely the line should be that it's having a sex offender hanging around changing rooms that is a problem, not having a trans person in changing rooms that is wrong. No one has ever claimed trans people never commit crimes. But a group of people shouldn't be blamed for the crimes of a few of its members. We don't let people get away with that with other identities.
except we kinda do. That’s One reason why there are women only spaces.
anyway we know where this thread is going. Probably locked by Sunday now.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
There is no need for it to whatsoever. The topic under discussion is guardian censorship. Do you approve?
ska invita
back on the other side
how much would you spend on a bath? to the nearest thousand?
nope. It’s pretty shoddy.
Similar threads
