Poor. Very, VERY poor.

They have ‘paid’ already. The HARD way.

And are you suggesting that YAM doesn’t know that? What nonsense.

A paid tour contributes to the running of the museum that is set up to remember these guys. I don’t think ‘very poor’ is fair at all.

Kicking off people who had booked a tour and contributed to the museum would be poor and I’m sure they would have accommodated the vets if they returned. It sounds like the nimrod guys did their best too. Also the people onboard may not have been aware of the vets presence as when you are in these aircraft often you don’t hear much of the outside world particularly if you are upfront.

People get outraged so easily. The team at YAM work tirelessly and one thing results in them being termed as ‘very poor’. Without them there would be no Halifax to see in the first place!!

Dan,

Possibly the best post I’ve read in a long time and certainly the best the two images posted!

Yes, it’s not the best film ever (far far from it) but it has inspired Dans son and therefore must have inspired more kids. It is serving a purpose and more people will hear of the role of black airmen in ww2 through this film than any other way at the moment.

A great story.

My feelings about where aircraft belong and the difference between a flying and a static are well known 🙂

You make static aircraft in a museum seem like a negative rather than a valued resource for researchers, historians and the general public to learn from – as there are not the finances and economy to support every historic aircraft flying indefinitely what would you propose as an alternative? Static aircraft in a museum are a necessity if they are to continue to exist. Your labelling of them as corpses seems to me like a over dramatic use of terminology to get your point over with a bit of shock factor thrown in. I’m sure though you see the positives of static collections?

Wings – you seem to have an understanding problem with discrimination and opinion .
Stopping or in some way dissuading teenage parents from visiting is clearly not happening – it’s opinion that these play facilities will be inhabited by social groups . So whether that’s teenagers with kids- four wheel drive Chelsea tractor owners with
spoilt kids or any other group matters not a jot !

As to researching the subject of teenage pregnancy – I am more than happy to retain my views that
It clearly takes two and there is a degree of choice- I am sure you will tell me it’s society however to blame!

No society is not to blame and most people are responsible did their own actions and there is a large degree f choice but not in all cases. It’s not black and white. Your comment that I would blame society is the stock accusation used by people who want to undermine others with less rigid and black and white views.

I’ll explain my position one more time but I fear you may not listen but here goes..

Mike Js comment is, if as read (and he hasn’t said otherwise so I think we can assume for now) indicating that it’s a negative that parents may use new potential facilities as a play centre. That’s the OPINION part and reasonable. One might not see a museum as being the place for a play area. I would but we are all welcome to our own opinion. All fine.

The part that I find DISCRIMINATORY is that teenage parents were singled out. Even if you don’t agree with me surely that highlights what I find objectionable and that it is not his OPINION on the suitability of play centres for Hendon but the fact that he would choose to highlight teenage parents over any other sort of parent as being a negative thing for the museum. That is why I find it narrow minded. I was on a bus the other day and saw a very touching relationship between a teenage parent and their child. On the next bus there may well have been a teenage parent whose parenting skills were questionable. The point is is that conclusions shouldn’t be made on one demographic based on stereotypes or a few people from that demographic that we come into contact with.

It is my opinion that Mike J should clarify that what he was getting at is his like or dislike of the provision at all of play areas or for him to say outright that he finds teenage parents more objectionable. A simple response would do but he has chosen not to only to have a couple of mild digs at me which hint I’m over the top.

Only you David have engaged in a discussion on the matter and I feel you would do your best to portray me in the same ‘bleeding heart liberal’ stereotype as is often used if someone goes against the grain on this forum. I don’t fit that stereotype and have reasonable set out my objection. Don’t judge me on what you THINK I may say, judge me on what I have said. Or ask me my opinion. I can only judge Mike Js opinions on his comments which he won’t clarify.

Can’t be fairer and clearer than that. I’m sad that so many people think that little asides like the one that I have brought up are ok. Each little broad brushstroke does a little damage each time and some broad sweeping stereotypes selp-perpetuate. I think this is sad.

It’s just an indoor playground for all the Jeremy Kyle mums off the estate.

you’ll fit in well here Black Knight.

Wow.

So, it’s ok to make certain comments which are (or it seems) prejudiced as long as it is tongue in cheek and you’ve been here for a long time? How much experience do I need to gain before Ill be able to see these as light hearted and as a bit of fun?

If Mike J was being saracastic/cynical then yes it is narrow minded. People can have whatever views they want but it doesn’t mean they are not offensive and insenstive. IF someone intimates that it is a bad thing that one section of society may use a public museum more and that they are highlighted for a specific reason with a negative slant then that is wrong. If Mike J had made a comment about parents bringing their kids to a play space then it could indicate for example that the problem was with the museum being turned into a playcentre or something along those lines. Why though does the fact that the parent is a teenager have any influence on anything!

The idea that all teenage parents have choice is a silly thing to bring up. First of all not all teenagers who fall pregnant have the choice…or a free choice.. and you should perhaps read a bit around the subject and show more empathy for people who’ve faced difficult choices at an earlier age in their life. I just don’t fundamentally get why Mike J had to highlight that they are ‘teenage’. What has it got to do with anything. Have a problem with a play area in a museum? I wouldnt but its a legitimate thing to perhaps not like but to highlight as a negative that a particular kind of parent might use it (who has done nothing wrong) is really sad in my opinion. It wouldn’t be acceptable to highlight a parent as being disabled, too old, too rich, too poor, of a particular ethnic background etc so that someone is young shouldn’t have an impact either.

David, do you think he had a point? Do you think a teenage mother is less deserving of the facility? It would be sad if you did.

Only Mike J can enlighten us on what he meant.

That’s great news, a soft play area to attract the local teenage mums looking for free entertainment on a rainy day! 😀

Presuming you are being sarcastic? Tell me Mike J, why single out teenage mums in your cynical comment. Why not just extend it to mums or parents looking for free entertainment? Presumably there is a reason why teenage mums deserve to be singled out? Public museums, galleries and parks are just that..PUBLIC. For everyone, not just the informed, the well-off, fortunate…for EVERYONE. If a teenage mum wants to come along to the facilities that Hendon offers then isn’t that great. She or he (because there are teenage dads too you know and also non teenage parents who will welcome it) might spend a bit in the cafe or might wander into the museum, you never know.

Or were you not been sarcastic and judgmental.