Job Interviews

I think those people are allowed to be come senior lecturers and are
kept in those jobs because they are just too scary to have in the
general population.

They couldn't get or keep a job which has commercial goals and KPI's
anyway.

Theo

 

For shame, Johno!!! Gerry & I are ALWAYS nice to each other!

betty (nice glass of red for me thanks petal!)

 

Only if he had big tits.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WooHoo!
....now where's my interview suit.....?

 

The other place to find one of them if you really have to is Quake clans

 

A friend of mine in Tas got transferred to Warrane High School. She's
a bloody good teacher, a couple of years older than me, still likes to
go doing silly things on motorbikes and ride horses and come up the
highlands with us playing silly buggers on quad and trail bikes and
the like.

Warrane is a fairly difficult area in Hobart, but she can get the
kids' attention from what I have been told. Which is why the education
dept assigner her there to keep the rebel kids under control. She got
great kudos the first day diving to work in her hubbies latest XR8 ute
with all the extras
(Well it seemed silly to toake the 4.8 Landcruiser there with just one
person in it).

Kev

 

Naah that one's simple; blokes would GO if they had to do creative dressing
too!
Why do you think football-teams, armies, clergies, mine-sites, steelworks
etc. all wear the same clothing?

Only gay men can stand shopping for clothes.

 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaargh, Jeeezus Nev, I laughed so much I nearly lost the last
glass of red there!

betty

 

OT. does a sysadmin know how to use smileys with sea monkey? cause I
don't and I would like to.

 

The problem is that by the time you lift up the boots and turn them
upside down to look at the instructions, you have poured piss all over
you. Discouraging TPMs from looking at the fine manual is not a good
thing.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:55:26 +1100

Smileys?

you know that saw about "I could tell you but then I'd have to kill
you"?

In the case of smileys the killing comes first.

Zebee
- channelling Simon[1].

[1] sysadmin joke.

 

<shrug> cultural norms are cultural norms - wearing any clothing at
all is nonsensical for much of the year; yet we still do.

Elizabethan era ruffles around the neck look bloody stupid from the
perspective of the 21st C and I'm sure a suit and tie in Oz will look
just as silly from afar, but so what.

We are a herd animal as with all small physically weak omnivores, and
hence cultural conformity is the price you pay for the herd's
protection of numbers. To use the literally nonsensical syllogism "you
can't have your cake and eat it too".

Play the game by the rules, or don't play the game, either is fine.
However if you choose to try and play the game while breaking some of
the rules, don't whine when there's a penalty or you get the red card
and it's off the field of play.

As Clem rightly pointed out, most men hate shopping, so men's
wardrobes are commensurately simple - casual or formal, with 2 subsets
of each - REALLY casual (1A) (schlepping around the house or doing
manual labour) and general casual - jeans and a tshirt etc (1B) Then
there's formal(2a)and REALLY formal (penguin suit)2B. Blokes like it
that way 'cos it makes it easy.

One of those 4 options will always be the right choice - for an office
job involving customer contact it's usually 2a , for a technical job
it's usually 1B, for manual labour it's 1A. Everyone knows the rules
and it's easy to comply because you know the rules.

The male gender (within our society) collectively creates and enforces
the rules

That's because a) wimmin generally like shopping and b) as a species
our mating displays of finery are by the female not the male, ( male
mating displays tend to be of the performance variety hence all those
teenagers getting themselves killed proving how fearless they are...)

You shouldn't, read some anthropology. In almost all species only one
gender will "peacock" the other will be more dowdy (think of the
peacock and peahen for example)


JL

 

Y'know it's interesting but I can't find on google groups the post
where Zebee said that...

JL

 

The implication as to why you find that relevant is slightly
disturbing "Not that there's anything wrong with that" TM

Yeah well that'd be me too ;-(

JL

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 25 Mar 2010 01:20:42 +1100

THe object was to pour. To fail to do so while turning said boot
upside down completely failing at the task.

Although assuming they can read is probably not sensible.

Zebee

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:19:24 -0700 (PDT)

Message-ID: <>

Zebee

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:13:18 -0700 (PDT)

So explain European male clothing between 1300 and 1800.

I point you specifically to 15thC Italy, early 16thC England and mid
18thC France.

Peacocks were not in it my old son!

I forget which of Elizabeth the First's Earls, Leicester? was known
for having a pearled doublet that was worth more than the house he
lived in...

I dunno why the cultural imperative changed. There wa a swing back in
the 60s and 70s but not much of one.

At some point the signalling of wealth changed from bright and
flamboyant to hand made but sober. Perhaps because who you were
signalling to changed, you were signalling to far fewer people, and
the wealth was better off in banks because there were some.

On the other hand, my SCA experience is that if you give the male of
the species a chance to dress brightly and show off magnificent
clothes most of them will.

Zebee

 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

Yup!

<waves to Zebee>

.....and I don't even know what SCA means.

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Mmmm.... good point, I guess we need an anthropologist !

I'm out of my depth on why the shifts, however I think in the era of
male dandery (I doubt it was 1300-1800 - more like ~1500-1750 IMNSHO
but feel free to widen my knowledge set) the female was perhaps less
flamboyant ?

I still think it's all about mating displays....

JL

 

You post that like it's helpful to finding it on googlegroups - you're
such a bloody sysadmin sometimes !!

G-G message ID number would be more helpful (1)

JL
(1) Which of course is the fatal logic flaw - assuming that was an
attempt to be helpful

 

Society for Creative Anachronisms IIANSM

JL