Cycling as a mode as a transport... whatever I happen to be wearing plus usually a cycle short mesh liner under the skirt/dress. The liner isn't guaranteed, particularly if it's just a supermarket dash or something similarly short. That said, it does depend on the time of the month and I have been known to switch from jeans to baggy cycle shorts and a liner when I really wanted the padding.
When cycling for the purpose of cycling (cycle touring, stretching my legs for a few hours on a sunny day) definitely a baggy cycle short plus mesh liner. On the top, layers depending on the weather, I have a favourite ground effect sport bra for hot days, then some kind of shirt. I also have a ground effect windfoil jacket which I absolutely adore, it somehow works far better than my other windfleece for cycling, I think because it's longer at the back and tighter through the arms.
Never, ever, lycra shorts :) I don't see any advantage in them over a mesh liner under something else, and they'd make me feel like I was being a pretentious serious cyclist wannabe :)
Thanks :) When I read the leg it looked like the list determination happened after the declaration in s179, and so would occur in parallel with recounts, which could lead to disproportionality if there was a change at recount.
Do you happen to know, is the decision about the number of list seats for each party set already? Or does it wait until after recounts?
My grandmother and her brothers and sisters got to choose their "name" about the age they started high school. This replaced all nicknames and was their name for life. Only one of them picked their legal name.
My grandmother's family was also originally Brethren, and also had a lot of less than obvious nicknames (Evelyn became Sally, for example). I've always assumed it was a sign of the times, but I now wonder if it was a Brethen tradition.
To restate a point from somewhere up thread.
Every time the media prints a little bit more detail it invades the privacy of Veitch's victim, it adds to her pain and, we could comfortably assume, her shame and humiliation.
Every time we sit here trying to figure out what happened to her, how long she lay in pain, how much of her body was how broken, how emotionally shattered she must be we invade her privacy, we add to her pain, shame and humiliation.
In my opinion we should leave the detail alone, we should leave her what privacy she has, and the self respect and self confidence she has rebuilt since she was attacked.
We don't need to know the detail, that's what the justice system is for
The thing I can most honestly offer her is the hope that if she ever walks down the same street as me I won't recognise her, that she won't see pity or prurient interest in my eyes.
24 hours and I am still boggled by the last sentence of the Holmes interview:
There is another harrowing meeting to prepare for as he fights, as he must, to save his career and his livelihood.
That paints a pretty disturbing picture of Holmes' world view. Why is saving his career and livelihood the must? Aren't there things that Holmes would think are worth more than that?
Starting from just yelling/swearing at someone through to a sadistic killing it is all a matter of degree and chance.
As I think I wrote somewhere up thread there is an element of chance, my genetics make it much less likely that I will cause serious damage if I were to attack an adult.
But even if I was born huge and strong and with a genetically predetermined impulse control deficiency, and grew up in a household where violence was the norm, I could still control myself. It might be physiologically harder, it might be psychologically harder, but it would be possible, and whether I beat my partner to death or not would be entirely my responsibility, not a matter of chance.
What a nightmare. Wrong if you front up. Wrong if you do. Wrong if you have a cheerful photo. Wrong if have a sombre one. Wrong if you express admiration for the victim. Wrong if you don't etc etc. What ever you say or do is wrong after the event.
Yes, it's very hard to see what Veitch could do right at the moment - partly because we're all reacting to the utter wrongness of what he's already done, and partly because the right things would be really really hard for him to do.
In my opinion right would be to walk away from the publicity, from the media and walk toward the justice system. Issue one statement which says "Although I woul like to explain my actions and seek public forgiveness and acceptance I will not cause my victim, or her and my family and friends, any further pain by encouraging the media coverage of an issue which is so intensely private and personal. What happened is my responsibility and mine alone, I will bear the consequences. I have contacted the Police and will be making a full statement to them directly."
Every time he talks to the media at the moment we can hear him avoiding any truth that would see him charged. We also hear him prolonging the media fuss, which can only hurt his victim and others.
Both of these are the sound of a man continuing to avoid responsibility for his actions.
What conclusions and actions are there for us?
We can conclude that Veitch did a bad thing.
We can conclude that the justice system should do something about it.
We can express that we think that Veitch should not be held up as role model or put in positions where he might be seen that way.
We can express that we would like people and organisations associated with him to express their condemnation of his actions.
We can try to change our communities so that the next time a man is in the position Veitch was he does not act as Veitch did.
We can try to change our communities so that the next time a woman is in the position that his victim was she feels supported, and knows that she will not be blamed, shamed or attacked for her attacker's actions.
Anything else? We seem to have all the evidence we need to draw all the conclusions and take action.