Zombie

What a complex web of deceit you've woven. Pure evil!

Puts a whole new evil twist on the Clark Kent / Superman identity disguise thing gone bad

Like all good comedy this requires suspension of disbelief. I mean, the choice between honouring a prank promise to an evil best friend, or securing a wet-dream-adonis-Mr-Perfect boyfriend / partner and living happily ever after. It's a tough one isn't it?

“A d-dick?” Lady Bracknell couldn't have said it better

Wow. A lawyer with a heart. You're so inventive!

Just sitting here with a stupid grin on my face while I read this ...

Evil cliffhanger! Lucky I'm late to the story so the next chapter's ready + waiting

Office gossip! It's the cream cake no-one admits they love

It just gets better. I love tasteless ties (on other guys )

"they infected me" Hahah

Gaydar granddads - priceless! And little Man is a little star.

Hahah - love the Jenny character

Yeah, agree with comicfan body painting can be a very sexy "fancy dress" look Here's a sexy elf http://farm5.staticf...338692308_z.jpg

Present tense narratives. Don't know is this is a peeve because I just refuse to read them. I suppose the "peeve" is that at the back of my mind is the thought that it might be a really good story I'll never get to read because of my dislike. Sorry if this upsets any writers here

The US has gun crime, the UK has knife crime. Apart from the repugnance of State judicial killing, a major problem with the death penalty is where do you draw the line? Which type of killing should have the death penalty and which should not? And when you've decided on which type does / does not have the death penalty you then have the issue of evidence (where the defendant pleads not guilty) to prove the defendant killed the victim. Or (as in this case) evidence to prove the defendant had the necessary state of mind. The burden of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt". But that does not mean no doubt. This case seems clear cut in that there seems no doubt Roy killed Jack. But where the defendant denies the killing it is down to evidence. And we all know how fallible evidence can be even with modern forensics and DNA. We all know how fallible so-called "expert witness" testimony can be. There have even been cases where the police, convinced of someone's guilt, have tampered with evidence or even lied on oath to secure a conviction, so convinced were they that "cutting corners" was the right thing to do to "get that bastard put away". We also know of many cases where people wrongly convicted of murder have subsequently been acquitted - in some of these cases their innocence has been confirmed by the Crown and compensation paid. If these people had they been executed then the opportunity to right the wrong would no longer exist - because they would be dead. Emotionally I understand your reaction and wish to have the death penalty reinstated. But you must accept that if your wish was granted then more innocent people would inevitably be executed. You might think that was a reasonable price to pay. I suspect the innocent person being executed would think differently. Would I feel differently if Jack were my brother / lover? I'm sure I would. But that would be my personal emotional response. And States should not make policy decisions based on emotion.

Thanks for your link Dan. Made me all gooey inside reading it. This could be a GA story!

Walk on Water 2004 I watched this Israeli film over the weekend. It's a quality production involving a Mossad agent and a young gay German. Beautifully shot on location in Turkey, Israel and Germany and with dialogue in English, German and Hebrew, the film observes the complex attitudes between Israelis and Germans, and between Israelis and Palestinians. But the main focus of the film is the developing relationship between the agent, the young German and his sister. Worth seeing. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0352994/

To lose one (ship) may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose (two) looks like carelessness (with apologies to Oscar Wilde ) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2107175/Costa-Allegra-Ship-run-company-Concordia-adrift-Indian-Ocean-Seychelles.html

Hmm. Is that a herd of pigs I saw fly past the window? We should want change. Maybe you have in mind male / female roles just from a US perspective where, even though opportunities are supposedly equaled, powerful male vested interests still dominate (just look at the boards of the top 500 companies - how many female CEOs are there? Jeeze, how many senior board positions are held by women? Not a lot. And is there a realistic chance yet of a female US President?). But if you're talking globally then in many countries in areas like the Middle East or Africa, women are pretty much where women in Europe were in the Middle Ages, if not much worse. So your wish for roles to be eliminated "in another few decades" seems optimistic. For that to happen in those countries is going to require some kind of "cultural revolution". Males don't give up their territory, privilege and status willingly or easily wherever they are. Maybe that's another male stereotype but a true one I think.

Good one. And "sidewalkers" who don't indicate before swerving in front of you or just stopping altogether and causing a "crash". And horrid little shopping bags on wheels. Uuuurrgh.

That's the mystery of Agatha Christie - that she sells so many books containing cardboard cutout characters. Well obviously not her personally - not with being dead an' all.

I knew someone who did just that several years ago when he and his wife, both medical doctors (GPs), were clients of the company I worked for at the time. They had been married over 25 years, lived a conventional family life and had two children on the verge of leaving home. He, Steven, one day announced to his family that he had always felt he was a woman in a man's body but had lived a conventional life trying to suppress these feelings while bringing up his family. Now aged 50+ he had an overwhelming desire to live as he felt he should be living and told them he wanted to change his identity, to live as a woman, dress as a woman and adopt a woman's name. His family were, understandably, shocked. However, after a period of adjustment, they were very supportive. He continued to live with his wife, adopted the name Sarah (or similar) and continued working as a GP. The first time I met Sarah after the change it could have been a different person, including a different voice. I suppose this helped because, for me, Sarah was a different person (wig, makeup, floral dress - the lot) who just happened to have the same file details as Steven. The only thing that struck me was that Sarah hadn't got the whole makeup thing quite right. Sarah seemed entirely comfortable as this new person and, I understand, later had counseling for reassignment surgery but I don't know if Sarah pursued this because I had left the company by then and lost contact.

Hahahah - Administrative Sex! You gotta love whoever coined that one. Hahaha!! Thanks for the detailed response Graeme. I must be honest here; when I posed the wider question I didn't really expect to get a definitive answer, although I have learned some interesting things from you and others who have posted here. It's all part of life's rich pageant

My bad Graeme. My post was muddled like my mind (I should have been asleep!) The thread title is Gender Stereotyping. But, or course, sex has reared it's head The two can and do get confused. I get confused (I'm still writing 2011 on cheques!). So I have 3 questions: 1. Graeme, when you said "Boy toddlers will quite happily urinate in public if they need to. That makes their gender quite obvious" did you mean to say "That makes their sex quite obvious" or is this a behavioral gender difference and, if so, is this the only behavioral gender difference you see exhibited by toddlers? (one of your posts said there's no effective gender difference between young boys and girls) 2. Is it the accepted position here that: - "gender" is a social construct and there is nothing "inherent" or "innate" about gender but rather it is exclusively informed or arises from our individual upbringing, experiences within and exposures to "society" i.e.family, teachers, other people, culture, social norms / behaviours etc etc? (however #25 sorgbarn's post suggested a possible biological influence) - gender is quite separate and distinct from sex or biological makeup? - we can therefore ignore sex, sexual orientation, sexual identity, M2F and F2M surgery and everything else to do with the body, bodily responses, hormones etc when considering "gender"? - if it were possible to remove all these external / societal influences then the concept of gender would be removed as well? 3. Take as an example a boy and a girl taken at birth and brought up, each in isolation, by caring but "gender neutral" identical robots in identical "gender neutral" environments. On reaching adulthood would you expect to see no distinguishing gender characteristics / behaviours between them? Or, if you would expect to see some distinguishing gender characteristics / behaviours, then what would you expect those to be?