Quelle surprise! Rob hasn't FOTTFSOF and is in fact hiding in the bushes at Henwee's school. Discuss the latest unlikely Archers events here.

[PseudoBadger]

What do we want?
Realistic storylines!
When do we want them?
As soon as the writers see this!

"I find it repugnant that you were willing to "switch sides" morally as soon as you learnt a certain religious group was on the same "side" as you"

You are joking, aren't you? Tell me you're joking!

Me too, and I appreciate the nuances of the position. I also think affairs are in general a wrong and hurtful thing whether or not you are a Christian (but I don't think they are uniquely wrong and hurtful, there are a lot of marital premises which have equal potential to hurt if they are broken).

So why does anyone need to signal that their personal morality has a specific basis, particularly when it's well-understood that such ethics are widely shared? (It would be an odd global religion that did not share ethics with much of the world, actually). If you were to say, "Well, as an ancient Phoenician, my world view includes incredibly angry gods that will wreak havoc unless we appease them with regular child sacrifice, so that's why I think Agamemnon had a point in killing his daughter Iphigenia before embarking on a war", I would think you a barbarian, but I would understand your deeply eccentric point of view, and why you needed to explain it. I don't know why Bert is reacting adversely, but I know a lot of people who get irritated by people telling them their religious beliefs. They simply don't want to know and think it deeply irrelevant. And uninformative.

No, I'm not joking.

Your comment was along the lines of "now I've seen that people have expressed a Christian morality on the behaviour of L&J, I'm cheering on L&J", so I took that to mean you had changed from disapproval to approval. How else could I interpret it? And one of your reasons for switching appears to be wanting to disassociate from Christians (even if you agreed with their moral conclusion), which I would suggest is a dubious way of adopting a moral view. But I'm happy to be corrected if I've misinterpreted your thought processes.

And there was me thinking this was the only corner of mumsnet where we don't stone adulterers.

I'm enjoying the storyline. Miranda and Justin have an arrangement, condoned by society and mumsnet. Lilian and Justin have an arrangement that's not. There's potential for emotional losses and gains for all parties. There are lots of ways to contribute misery and damage to relationships, infidelity isn't the only one.

It just looks fairly human to me!

It was the "oh, I thought it was just me with my "backward" Christian beliefs" that got me. I loathe people of faith assuming that they are more moral and ethical than people without. And that coupled with the really offensive ageist comment really pissed me off. Anyway, as you were. Back to the Archers.

Where the hell is Henry's social worker?

Cromwell - I actually agree that it shouldn't be necessary to mention a particular religious source to back up a moral position, when common ground on what is hurtful is enough to reason it out.

I only mentioned Christianity because Fink did, and I wanted to at least express that I identified with her on that. And I believe Fink mentioned it because until today it felt like there had been little disapproval of L&J, and maybe she wondered if outside of Christianity, the idea of an extra-marital fling was fine, as long as nobody found out or (as Jolene said) you truly loved each other.

So, it's a good thing to discover that in fact many of us disapprove regardless of whether we are Christians or not.

really offensive

glowfrog I think it was pretty clear you didn't mean to offend, but I don't think you get decide if other people are offended!

Well, as long as we're all happy disapproving, or approving, of fictional characters, then that's fine!

have a French class to dash to now. Shall I ingratiate myself with my tutors by announcing that, as French people, they of course are all ripping their knickers off for their cinq a sept, and no-one gets hurt because they are all so very raffines???

Yes. Really offensive. Try "the thought of black people doing it makes me want to spew"

I suggest you take that away and think about it.

Anyway. About Henry's social worker. And do we have any sort of consensus on whether Toby was telling the truth or not?

Well, I'm not defending the ageist comment, but then I'm pretty sure that was an attempt at humour...

And there was me thinking this was the only corner of mumsnet where we don't stone adulterers. You might recall that Jesus stopped the stoning of an adulterer (setting an example to Christians), but he did then say to her "go, and sin no more", not "have fun, and make sure you don't get caught next time".

until today it felt like there had been little disapproval of L&J

Oi DDD! Last April!

And glow, I didn't take offence. I don't like to hear anyone having sex on the Archers! Not Tom, not Kirsty, not Jolene, not Sid, not Helen, not Neil, not Susan NOT anyone! 😁

That's true, witchmountain, and I should probably have resisted the urge to make that joke, but sometimes one just has to poke that bear(t).

Was Toby lying? It's hard to tell. From a character point of view, he's a slippery customer, and it's difficult to trust what he says, and his explanation does raise a few questions. (For example, as someone raised on the last thread, why didn't he text or phone Pip while he was in Brighton). So, I'm not convinced without more evidence (eg Rex's corroboration).

On the other hand, it was a long explanation, and it may have been the SW's best attempt to lay the whole Brighton thing to bed, so that it never needs mentioning again, in which case, there is no more mystery and this was the truth...?

Didn't Toby say his phone had no battery?

Oi, vango, that's why I said "little" rather than "no".

agree about not wanting to hear any sex on the archers. Particularly with kids in the room!!

I don't care what arrangement Justin has with Miranda, i can't bear liars and he is lying massively. Add on the glee they seem to feel in the illicitness of the affair and I find it seedy and unpleasant. (And I'm not a Christian!). I can't bear it when people seem to think their great love story counts above everything else.

Anyway, agree about Henry and the sw - what is going on there?

And re the public service message - I suppose on the plus side they have stopped trying to push that angle which was going big time last year.

What I really did like to hear this week was the little baa lambs. nearly as much as Lil's joyous dirty laugh. No, but really, on a damp day it was lovely.

I suggest you take that away and think about it.

Hahahahahahaha!

Cromwell as a French person I found your comment REALLY OFFENSIVE, as you seem to think all French people have loose morals.

Replace French with black people, I suggest you take that away with you etc etc.

Eh? Glowfrog??? You did get that I was joking didn't you? About the lazy stereotyping of French people and their 'sophisticated' view of EM affairs?

Anyway, as a person trying to improve my French, I'd better get off now. HOpe you don't all tear yourself to pieces this afternoon. Yikes!

Cromwell of course I knew you were joking! Bonne après-midi. :-)

And yeah ... Whichever SW thinks six year old Henry can keep a secret ...

I've known ten year olds who struggle with the concept. (Particularly around Christmas/Birthday presents for their parents.)

I agree that Lilian and Justin's affair is seedy. Lilian literally wandering into Jennifer's kitchen in a fur coat with no knickers ugh ugh. And they do seem horribly gleeful about it.

The little surprise will be: take the baby out of the pram/cot/baby gym and carry him to me when mummy's not looking.