Interesting Links for 25-01-2013

[andrewducker]

• A detailed report into the state of the Edinburgh tram work.
  (tags: trams edinburgh )
• MPs to plan for gay royals marrying same-sex partners and their children becoming king or queen
  (tags: lgbt monarchy uk )
• The Great Face-Paint Debate
  (tags: society women feminism )
• The USA is about to have an unsigned artist at #1 for the first time ever.

Comments

[strawberryfrog]

Re "6 Reasons You Should Sleep Naked"

The phrases "Your Hoo-Ha" and "According to naturopath" indicate that this is not an article to take at all seriously.

[andrewducker]

But the comments are fantastic!

[strawberryfrog]

Unsurprisingly, I didn't get as far as the comments. I'm having a look now :)

[cartesiandaemon]

Yeah, I usually never read the comments. But now I come to think of it, if some of the worst comments are on some of the best articles, maybe it's only fair that some of the best comments are on some of the worst articles...

The article may have a point, if you stop at "be comfortable" and don't assume the only reason to be comfortable is to make yourself super thin.

[bart_calendar]

I thought for sure you'd be pushing the star wars news today.

[andrewducker]

As soon as it's confirmed by JJ or Disney, I will!

So far everyone is quoting "a person close to the production" or similar.

So it may be true, or it might be the same kind of thing as the hoax about XBox games I liked to yesterday.

[bart_calendar]

Yeah, but Forbes doesn't tend to fuck around. If it was on a Gawker media site I'd be less inclined to believe it.

Plus, my local Virgin Records sent me an ad today with the new logo containing J.J.'s name - and I doubt a major chain store just happened to have a fake logo on hand to send out, or would risk being sued by Disney for sending out a fake logo.

[andrewducker]

If you mean this Forbes article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/01/24/star-trek-director-j-j-abrams-to-direct-star-wars-episode-vii/

then it's a comment piece, put up by someone whose only source is The Wrap, which is still quoting "an individual with knowledge of the production".

Which doesn't mean it's not happening (you'll note that there's not been a denial). But as Disney haven't officially confirmed it, there's not a chance that they've sent out art to local record stores to hand out - that would count as an official source!

[innerbrat]

Not that I don't want a gay person - or child of a gay marriage - to be monarch, but shouldn't MPs be pressing for more important changes to this kind of thing, like recognizing remarried divorcees?

[andrewducker]

Divorcees are evil, and shall not be allowed to run the country unless they renounce satan first.

Hmmm, what happens if Kate's kid is a single mum? I assume that doesn't cause any problems for the succession.

[tobyaw]

Divorce suggests a lack of commitment and/or bad judgement and/or a focus on self rather than others.

Any of which could be a good reason to be denied the monarchy.

[inamac]

I'm assuming that the succession is still governed by the 'heirs of the body' rule - which allows for AID but not adoption (which is what the article implies), Kate's daughter would take the throne on her own behalf, to be succeeded by her child in due course.

I suspect that the situation has arisen in the past - most have.

[phillipalden]

It IS impossible to be completely safe. The world is a dangerous place, and that's part of what makes it so interesting.

[alitheapipkin]

Now I'm even more annoyed about that Woman's Hour piece and I was already ranting about how I'm sure the fact that a bunch of presenters act like anything tech is rocket science* doesn't help matters (the One Show lot were doing it with Brian Cox too - apparently Alex thinks basic pre-GCSE biology is really hard).

*Yes, I know, but it's a funny play on the stereotype, honest!

[andrewducker]

Yeah, I was completely baffled as to why they'd do that! I have no idea what they were thinking.