DragonFire

Have to agree with Mark on this one, defiantly as in cracker!

Have you ever had a partner cheat on you? Well that's what's going on with me at the moment. It seems my 'better' half has decided to advertise his wares on a dating website. Nothing resembling gaydar or the like you understand. No, this is quite a legitimate site, that ordinary singles go on in the hope of finding that special someone. So, not only is he deceiving me, but also, all the poor saps that reply to his profile. I have no idea if he's gone out and met anyone yet, and quite frankly, I really don't think I want to know. One thing's for certain, his ass is grass; he just doesn't know it yet. A lot of you are probably wondering why I don't give him an opportunity to explain, and maybe give him a second chance. Because everyone deserves one of those right? Yeah, I'd go along with that, the only problem is he's already on his second chance. Been there and done that with him already, when I found out he was arranging to meet his ex for some 'fun'. Trust me, it was difficult enough to forgive and forget then, to do it again....no chance. I mean, if he had a drunken fling, maybe, and that

I think what's really telling about the beginning of chapter 6, is an experienced captain heeding Grangers advice, rather than dishing out the orders himself. The young lieutenant was right though, and his diplomacy combined with people skills soon had the potentially dangerous situation well in hand. His compassion toward the men was admirable and certainly helped grease the wheels for a smooth takeover. Whilst on the other side Roberts was greasing something else altogether! Mr Wilcox is an interesting conundrum, whilst he may have been dismissed from the Navy; I feel this is only going to escalate an already bitter feud. I somehow doubt that he will take this lying down, so it will be fascinating to see what their next move is against Granger. I feel as everyone else here, that it will only be a matter of time before George gets his own command. But at his tender age, could he be slightly too young?

Your disguise is great...no-one would ever know it was you!

All I can do is keep fingers and everything else crossed that common sense will prevail......for once!

Ok guys, thanks for all the advice! What I will say, is that he has done something similar to this before. Whilst I'm all for second chances, and trust me it was hard enough to do that last time, I am wary of giving a third. After giving it a LOT of thought and talking to a few people, I just can't bring myself to do it. I just can't trust him anymore and it feels like something has died. So now I feel it's my turn to be sneaky and devious, and with the help of a good friend I intend to do just that.

Okay guys, I have a 'hypothetical' question. What would you do if you found out your partner had joined an on-line dating service? That he'd put down on his profile that he was 'currently separated', but failed to inform you about that small detail? That he'd also put on said profile suggestive innuendo's? Would you: A: Confront him immediately B: Hack into his e-mail to see what exactly is going on. Then confront him when he's dug himself a very big hole! C: Join yourself and pretend to be someone else to trap him? D: Any other suggestions not listed here. Also, take into account that you have a house together.

Ahhh, no. Quite accurate actually. Besides, America did smarten up, they elected Obama! Though they did put George W in the White House twice!!! Jury's out.

Yeah, yeah, we've herd it all before! Ahem.

Indeed, but their demands were excessive and it's hardly surprising the Admiralty were so angry. Did they actually believe the King would dissolve Parliament and make peace with France. Very strange and bizarre terms they wanted.

My mate Galahad pointed me in this direction, so glad he did.

Thanks for those Mark, you've hit on one of my favourite subjects, history. If only I could remember all the dates, but am totally hopeless! The mutiny at Spithead was very civilized by all accounts, almost gentlemanly!

I think that's very much an English thing! But I can't recall anything you've written that sounds strange. We have so much American TV over here I think we're pretty used to things by now! I think it's us guys this side of the pond that have to be careful, with sayings and certain words which people beyond these shores won't get. There is one annoying thing, why do Americans pronounce herb...ERB? There is an H in it you know!!

So HMS Victory makes her entrance, and she is quite a beautiful ship, having walked round her in Portsmouth myself. Anyone that does get the chance, really needs to have a look see, the sheer scale of the ship [for it's time] is breathtaking. It does fill you with awe when you walk on her decks, knowing her history and the great battles she was involved in. But I digress. George certainly didn't waste any time finding someone to ease his sexual frustrations, but with the way this Devlin acts, it's nothing more than getting off to him. I imagine this suits George down to the ground, he has Travers after all, so any other emotional hook up would only complicate matters. It did come as a bit of a surprise that the crew mutinied on the Desperate, considering the penalty for such a thing back then. But considering the way Captain Wilcox treated the men under him he probably deserved it. I shall look forward to learning of the Captains fate at the hands of the crew, I can only imagine what they did to him!

Sounds like a barrow full of BS to me. I personally do think there are more versatile/bottoms and bottoms, but 90% bottom? Who's ass was that figure pulled from? [Pardon the pun] I think it's a bit ignorant of anyone to say that versatile guys are closet bottoms! I mean what exactly is this based on? Do we have a scientific theory or some kind proof that this is the case? If we do, I shall be very interested to see the evidence that backs this up! On a personal level I'd say I'm a versatile/top. Whilst I like both, I'm quite partial to a nice firm......

I agree with Galahad, something certainly stinks with this result. Kris has an okay voice, that it, just okay. Nothing special about him at all, IMO. Let the record sales commence.

I think this article from the Huffington post about sums it up, Homophobia Wins. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-david/ad...h_b_206154.html

Still reeling a touch from the result, but kind of expected it. Sony Entertainment will sign him up under one of their many labels I'm sure. What's going to be interesting, is which one of them this time next year will be the more successful? I'm betting Adam....any takers?

Mmm, I use them all the time, but then I'm English... I do find though, that I have to put a few Americanisms in now and again to make the story clearer. I always put 'cell' instead of mobile for example, because it's more universally recognised. For me it's just about clarity, and it does help having an editor who's not English, because he'll pick up on it if I slip.

Great to have you back & glad you're feeling better. So when's the first chapter and are there any cute boys in it??

The relationship between Granger and Travers seems to be intensifying as their feelings for each other grow stronger, which on reflection certainly bodes well for the future. Travers willingness, apparently out of the blue, to allow George to top him, just shows how far they have come. The trepidation they feel for each other

Well, if you read my earlier post........

I have never inserted any allegations that weren't without foundation. You even stated above that you think there is a stability problem when one of the parents is away, I merely argued against it, and I stand by my point that it's not always the case. I had two parents growing up, yes my dad was away for long periods sometimes, but he was also home for small stretches as well. This I think you'll find is quite the norm for service families. Trust me I wasn't being rude, you'll defiantly know when that happens. Also, I don't give a rat

Umm, what have we been talking about throughout this thread? My whole argument has been about the parents who are absent due to duties in the armed forces, not about the armed forces in general. Plus, considering I was replying to your point about my original post, I thought the subject was obvious!

As we are talking about people who serve away from their families in the armed forces, this post implies that you were referring to all, not some!