Archers thread #190: Carry on, Cleo! Best new character for ages. Discuss The Archers here.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed, and of course we are always delighted to welcome back former or occasional listeners/posters. We don't all agree on all points, although we do mostly try to be civil about it. Most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you'd be delighted to have your wedding reception across the lawn from the local Flower & Produce Show, or other unusual views.

Spoilers: not on this thread, please! We don't wait for the omnibus to discuss the weeknight episodes, but we do try our best to avoid cross-contamination from https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/radio_addicts/4636789-the-archers-spoilers-thread-7-cant-wait-for-702pm-join-us-here, where spoilers are positively welcomed!

For newer listeners, lurkers or those who just have no idea what we're talking about, @DadDadDad has created this useful thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have - BOOP point for him! (See thread for explanation.)

Charlotte Smith must have been delighted to get back to Countryfile and Farming Today. What a pile of piffle tonight. Ah well.

When is George expected back? It can't be long now, surely. It occurs to me that I can't recall whether he's ever spoken on air to Ruairi. As their actors are currently the best (IMO) amongst the younger members of the cast, I hope they will cross swords in some way.

And finally, I can't mention Carry on Cleo without squeezing in one of the best lines ever written (Denis Norden and Frank Muir have the credit): Infamy, infamy! They've all got it in for me! Currently, Lily probably feels this way.

https://youtube.com/shorts/eRnd48yTC5A?si=N05njp3uLfpSjAmI

Over to you!

That was surprisingly uneventful, which makes Mr concerned for Grange Farm tomorrow.

So George got out then. To spend more time with his fiancee, who he has never even kissed 😆

No shanking then.
Hmmpfff!

By 1983, the year Susan got pregnant, the pill was widely available even to the unmarried, as it had not been ten years earlier. Not true I was on the pill aged 17 in 1972. Ypu could get it from the Family Planning Clinic although you had to pay for it then.

I did say "widely". It had existed for a fair time before 1972, but not for all.

And you had to live within range of a Family Planning Association clinic or even Brook Advisory Centre, who asked fewer questions. Them as lived rural were not always in that happy position, and their GPs were unthinkable because they'd tell their parents.

The BBC says "That all changed in 1974 when family planning clinics were allowed to prescribe single women with the pill". Presumably you got yours off-prescription? I remember too that it varied from one health authority/district to another; in 1974 some of the University of Kent halls of residence on the original site at Beverly Farm were in an area where the pill would be prescribed and others were not (I can't remember which was which of County of Kent and City of Canterbury), and in one hall the boundary was literally down the middle of a corridor; this led to male and female undergraduates swapping rooms so the girls could all be in the health district that allowed the pill.

I got them from the Family planning clinic without a prescription or GP involvement and, obviously, I was unmarried. It was definitely before 1974 as I was no longer living with my parents by then and getting my supplies from firstly Chichester and then Bristol without any problems.

I genuinely did not know that giving out the pill without prescription was lawful in 1972. I'm glad for you that it was!

They changed the rules about it in 1974, that I do remember (and the BBC seems to agree). I thought it was the law that had changed.

It was hailed by young women as a wonderful thing because they no longer had to fear pregnancy. Within a very short time it was hailed by young men as a wonderful thing because women were no longer able to use possible pregnancy as a reason for saying no, and if they said no could be accused of being dykes, or cockteasers, or frigid.

Then STDs started to become widespread and it was realised the Sexual Revolution might not have been so all-round wonderful for everyone after all.

My very elderly London GP - long past retirement age - happily prescribed the pill to me, a single woman aged 19, in late 1971. And when - a few months later - I fell foul of the then infamous "hole in the pill" (as they referred to it, when you either forgot to take it or, in my case, had a D&V bug but stupidly failed to consider the consequences) he sent me straight to an NHS gynae man for a slap on the wrist, a brief lecture and what was then referred to as a "termination". Admittedly it did involve 3 nights in a gynae ward staffed entirely by Irish nurses who hissed at me about all the other women being there because they wanted babies, but it wasn't a mistake I made again.

But back on topic ... what is going to happen to George's new, spectacular muscles when he stops going to the gym? Will he go to fat?

Why didn't he have them when he was habitually hefting hay-bales and stray livestock?

The algorithms are definitely picking up on the sexxxy time chat here as there's now adverts for Lovehoney in between posts

I thought he did - wasn't there some storyline about him getting sunburn because he was trying to show off his muscles to Tilly Button or someone while haying?

But people keep saying that the prison gym has toned him up, or wtte. And he's so much fitter than he was that he wouldn't get into the clothes he went into prison wearing less than a year ago.

It was hailed by young women as a wonderful thing because they no longer had to fear pregnancy. Within a very short time it was hailed by young men as a wonderful thing because women were no longer able to use possible pregnancy as a reason for saying no, and if they said no could be accused of being dykes, or cockteasers, or frigid. This is true.

Wasn’t he somewhat inclined to revel in ‘these big guns’? I don’t think I made that up because it’s not part of my day-to-day vocabulary.
Anyway, we know George is now beeeg and strong. Yay. Watch out, pheasants turkeys, and also young wimmin. And Fallon.

I actually found tonight's episode surprisingly touching. George was so looking forward to hugging his mum and genuinely thrilled to be reunited with his family who were all equally thrilled to see him. The Grundys feel like a real family in a way the Archers no longer do quite so much. I wonder how Amber will slot in to George's reality and how much he will want her to - I think he's probably looking forward to being back in Ambridge more than cocktail bars in Digbeth and going out for sushi.

The exclusion of Neil and Susan is cruel. My family wouldn't put up with that crap.

I can’t imagine there are many prison officers who can spare the time for such a long caring chat with inmates about to be discharged. I believe discharge is a much more perfunctory affair.

Didn’t Susan and Neil self exclude?

You would think that George was coming back from war. They know no shame these Grundys, but then they never have especially Eddie and his ducking and diving. They would be better off just making sure George is back and then leave Amber and him to it.🤢
Do you think that Amber might want to move away from all the people that will not want anything to do with George., she has been told there is a long list.
Will.thier love last, I'm sure George would eventually want to forgive Susan and Neil but Amber will talk him out of it and they will be estranged until George and Amber spilt. Hopefully this will happen before they get spliced.
I'm writing this as though I care but I really don't.🤣

The thing with Neil and Susan is illogical given that George appears to have ‘forgiven’ Emma. So I don’t really understand what’s going on.

But then, I have recent experience of being blindsided by familial fallout involving someone of around George’s age that has no logical basis in fact. I can well imagine how frustrated and helpless and outraged they must feel. How many times, after all, has Emma had to flee to Ambridge View with George? The stupid prat would have been homeless without them, more than once. They’ve loved and supported him his entire life. And now some jumped up little influensa is gate keeping access to him?

<Tries not to wonder how George and Amber’s waking up this morning might be unfolding>

TottersBlandly

The thing with Neil and Susan is illogical given that George appears to have ‘forgiven’ Emma. So I don’t really understand what’s going on.

But Amber hasn't and everyone seems to feel Amber has to be kept sweet at all costs.
I've only recently started listening again and realise I don't know how George and Amber met. When she first appeared, I thought they had had a couple of dates before he went to prison but it sounds now like they didn't know each other at all before.
Is there a dating app like Love4Lags or Condr or something?

It turned my stomach. There should have been quiet relief he was out, not cheering and whooping and partying. When whoever it was said he needed to get a job there should have been mention of how hard that will be with a criminal record. There should have been talk of regret and shame.
But I suppose it was all in keeping with the general attitude of the Grundys who are a horrible family.

<Tries not to wonder how George and Amber’s waking up this morning might be unfolding>

Dunno, it seems a perfect excuse to use that yoghurt-soaked teatowel sound effect they're so proud of.

It's not been totally clear how they met, unless i wasn't paying attention, which is certainly a possibility.

It seems she knew of him from school and messaged him/wrote to him in prison and that's how it started.