The Whitechapel Fatberg

The Whitechapel Fatberg

https://www.londonmuseum.org.uk/collections/london-stories/whitechapel-fatberg/

 

In 2017, a stomach-churning discovery was made in a sewer below Whitechapel – a monster fatberg, a 250-metre long, 130-tonne mass of oil and wet wipes.

 

 

A world-famous blockage

After the fatberg was removed, a sample came to London Museum for a world-first display in 2018. It’s now part of our permanent collection.

 

The story created interest worldwide – with newspapers, TV stations and the public equally fascinated and revolted by it.

 

The fatberg is a monstrous product of Londoners’ lifestyles. It’s a foul reminder of the hidden systems which keep the city clean. And it’s a potent sign of the pressure our infrastructure is under.

 

Most of London’s sewage network was built over 150 years ago. To keep London clean and Londoners healthy, the city will need new solutions. But we must also know the impact of what we throw away.

 

Discovering and displaying the Whitechapel Fatberg

During a routine inspection in Whitechapel, east London in September 2017, Thames Water workers stumbled upon a gigantic solid blockage which was threatening to cause flooding.

 

“The blockage inspired a drag performance”

 

Fatbergs had been found before. But this was larger than any other. It was over 250 metres long – about the length of four football pitches, or the same as Tower Bridge. It weighed an estimated 130 tonnes, about the same as 11 double-decker buses.

 

Its discovery and display in the museum were a sensation – the fatberg was covered by the New York Times, CBS, Sky News, ABC Australia, Al Jazeera, every UK national paper and the BBC. The blockage inspired hundreds of millions of tweets, a musical, a drag performance and a cake replica.

 

A sewer tunnel covered in filth with a large blockage in the centre.The Whitechapel Fatberg discovered in the sewer tunnel. External Copyright. Thames Water

The Whitechapel Fatberg was a gruesome discovery.

 

What is a fatberg?

A fatberg is mainly made up of cooking fat, wet wipes and other sanitary products. When these are flushed down toilets or tipped down drains, they can congeal together, making a solid mass that causes a blockage.

 

The term “fatberg” was first used to describe rock-like lumps of cooking fat washed up on a British beach, but was adopted by London sewer workers and entered the Oxford English Dictionary in 2015.

 

What made this fatberg so giant?

The British diet has changed in past decades, becoming oilier. We also no longer see value in keeping or recycling oil. So more fat is ending up in our sewers. Lipids from hair conditioners and other cleaning products make the problem worse.

 

More people are also flushing waste that the sewer system isn’t designed for. Poo, pee and toilet paper are all our pipes should handle, yet non-degradable wet wipes frequently end up getting flushed. Wet wipes created the main structure of the Whitechapel Fatberg.

 

London’s rising population adds to the problem. The city’s sewers were built in the 1850s, following a design by Joseph Bazalgette. Although he planned for a growing city, London’s population has rocketed far beyond what he accounted for.

 

London’s super sewer

The 2021 census recorded 8.8 million people in London. That’s 626,000 more than just 10 years before. And the population is expected to continue growing. Without changes to London’s sewers, or unless Londoners change how they get rid of waste, there will be even more problems in the future.

 

The new 25km Thames Tideway tunnel – dubbed the “super sewer” – stretching from west to east London, is one answer. This huge project is designed to prevent waste being dumped into the Thames after heavy rainfall, something which previously happened regularly.

 

 

What happened to the fatberg after it was discovered?

At the press conference announcing the Whitechapel Fatberg’s discovery, we asked for a piece for London Museum. Thames Water agreed.

 

Workers began breaking up the fatberg. They used shovels and high-powered jets of water to clear the blockage, and sucked it up to the surface with a hose.

 

Small samples have ended up in our permanent collection. And the rest of it? Most was destroyed, but some was turned into biodiesel at a site in the north-west of England.

 

“We saw life emerge from the fatberg”

 

A transparent container holds several irregularly shaped, crumbly brown rocks on a black background.Sewage. © London Museum

Samples from the Whitechapel Fatberg were put on display at London Museum.

 

How was it preserved?

We were the first museum in the world to take, display and conserve a fatberg. We didn’t even know if it would survive.

 

When the fatberg was pulled out of the sewer, it was dangerous – full of bacteria and releasing toxic gases.

 

We decided drying the fatberg was the best way to put it on display. The piece in our collection was dried at the Thames Water depot at Beckton in Newham before coming to us.

 

How has the fatberg changed?

The fatberg lost weight as it dried. It became harder – more like the stuff you find stuck to sewer walls.

 

After being placed in a case, the fatberg began to sweat, releasing more of its moisture. As its moisture levels changed, so did the colour of the fatberg – from dark brown, to pale grey, then to a darker beige.

 

We saw life emerge from the fatberg. Inside its sealed case, mould grew. Flies hatched too, before and while on display. It’s likely these were Phorid flies, also called coffin flies, which feed off decaying matter.

Are nonstick pans toxic?

Are nonstick pans toxic?

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/are-nonstick-pans-toxic

 

Some people are concerned that nonstick coatings are harmful once they begin to degrade and shed plastic particles. While research partly supports this, it also shows nonstick cookware is likely safe when following precautions.

 

Nonstick pots, pans, and air fryers have become staples in many kitchens. A nonstick coating prevents food from sticking to the surface, making cooking and cleaning easy and reducing the need for oil or butter to prevent sticking. Nonstick cookware also distributes heat evenly, reducing hot and cool spots.

 

However, nonstick coatings are controversial, with many believing they can expose people to chemicals that may negatively affect health.

 

This article discusses the latest research into nonstick coatings, how to use nonstick cookware safely, and alternative options for people who wish to avoid it.

 

 

What is nonstick cookware?

 

Most nonstick cookware has a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) coating, a type of polymer or plastic commonly known as Teflon. This coating belongs to a group of chemicals called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

 

Many people are concerned that when PTFE gets scratched, microplastics or nanoplastics can enter food. Another concern is that heating PTFE at high temperatures or for a long time releases toxic particles into the air.

 

The consequences of this are unknown, but research suggests it may have negative health effects.

 

What does the research say about nonstick coatings?

 

Recent research supports the idea that nonstick coatings can increase the plastic humans ingest. However, it is unclear how this can affect health.

 

A 2022 study used a special imaging technique called Raman spectroscopy to examine what happens to nonstick coating during cooking.

 

The researchers used metal and wooden utensils with both old and new nonstick cookware and found they all caused tiny abrasions to the coating, which released PTFE particles. These particles were microplastics and nanoplastics (MNPLs).

 

Studies have suggested that swallowing MNPLs may damage the respiratory tract, causing problems such as asthma, bronchitis, and fibrosis. However, more research is necessary to confirm their effects.

 

A 2023 study used computer modeling to show how PFAS, such as PTFE, may affect the balance of a person’s thyroid hormones. A healthy thyroid gland is essential for brain function and regulating the metabolism.

 

The study found that PFAS affect how thyroid hormone molecules bind together by causing rigidity in the binding region. More research is necessary to determine how much exposure to PFAS is necessary to negatively affect thyroid function.

 

A 2022 study in China examined the link between prenatal exposure to PFAS, thyroid hormones, and infant development. The researchers found that greater PFAS exposure in pregnancy affected motor skills in male infants, concluding that PFAS can have an effect on early neurodevelopment. The researchers suggested that thyroid hormones may play a role in this relationship.

 

A 2024 study describes an incident in northern Italy in which PFAS contaminated the water between 1980 and 2018, affecting around 150,000 people.

 

Researchers analyzed death data from those years and found higher mortality rates from cardiovascular diseases and certain cancers, such as kidney and testicular cancer, in the affected population. This study provides further evidence of the harmful effects of PFAS exposure on health.

 

 

Are nonstick pans safe to use?

 

Nonstick cookware is likely safe to use if people follow precautions.

 

A 2024 study tested six types of aluminum-based cookware coated in Teflon or granite, commonly known as ceramic-coated. The researchers performed various corrosion, abrasion, and mechanical tests, and heated the cookware to various temperatures for varying lengths of time.

 

The results showed that prolonged heating and temperatures higher than 250°C (482°F) affected the internal structures of all the cookware. Ceramic-coated cookware showed fewer signs of wear, suggesting that it is more resistant to wear than PTFE-coated cookware. Teflon-coated cookware was more likely to degrade and transfer plastic particles into food or air.

 

Based on the results, the researchers recommended using aluminum-based nonstick cookware below 250°C (482°F) for a maximum of 45 minutes.

 

It is important to avoid scratching nonstick cookware, as this increases the chance of plastics sticking to food or utensils. Metal utensils may be more likely to scratch than wooden or silicone types.

 

Cleaning with abrasive tools, such as steel wool, is also likely to damage nonstick surfaces.

 

Best practices for using nonstick pans

 

Avoid using metal utensils. Try wooden or silicone instead.

Avoid using nonstick cookware at temperatures above 250°C (482°F) or longer than 45 minutes.

Replace pans if the coating is scratched or starts to flake.

 

Alternatives to nonstick pans

Nonstick cookware coated in Teflon can be convenient, but there are alternatives if people wish to avoid using it.

 

Options include:

 

cast iron

stainless steel

ceramic-coated cookware

 

Summary

 

Ingesting PFAS has been associated with hormonal imbalance, increased mortality from cardiovascular disease, and various cancers. However, it is unclear how much a person would need to consume to experience adverse health effects.

 

While concerns about the safety of nonstick cookware persist, current research suggests it is generally safe when people use it carefully.

 

This includes avoiding scratching the surface and replacing cookware if it is scratched or showing signs of degradation. Experts also recommend using nonstick cookware for less than 45 minutes at a time and at temperatures lower than 250°C (482°F).

 

If people wish to avoid nonstick cookware, they could try stainless steel, ceramic-coated, or cast-iron alternatives.

NHS staff battling wave of food supplement disinformation

NHS staff battling wave of food supplement disinformation

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jun/14/nhs-staff-food-supplement-disinformation-cancer-charity-social-media

 

Sun 14 Jun 2026 08.00 BST

 

Social media misinformation about the use of dietary supplements such as turmeric, St John’s wort and magnesium is now so common that dispelling online claims has become a routine part of NHS clinicians work.

 

Two out of five frontline health workers say they encounter patients who raise inaccurate or misleading information about supplements at least once a week.

 

Polling by YouGov for the World Cancer Research Fund found that the figure is even higher (53%) among nurses and midwives, with false information about nutrition and supplements now taking up what doctors describe as “precious time” in NHS consultations.

 

The WCRF says it fears that patients’ belief in unproven dietary regimes, vitamins and minerals is putting their health in danger and increasing their risk of getting cancer.

 

Dr Philippa Kaye said she saw the consequences of health misinformation every week in her GP surgery.

 

“My patients arrive clutching newspaper stories, social media screenshots, printouts from wellness websites or saved videos from TikTok.

 

“What particularly worries me is the widely held belief that if something is sold over the counter, marked as ‘natural’ or endorsed online, then it must automatically be safe and harmless, while prescribed medicines are somehow toxic,” she added. “As doctors, we know this simply is not true.”

 

Some popular supplements can involve hidden risks, according to Kaye. “People assume that supplements are safe because you can buy them over the counter without a prescription. But if something works, then there is an active ingredient in it that may also cause problems.

 

“For example, liver injury related to turmeric supplements, St John’s wort interacting with other medications, people thinking they are taking magnesium for sleep but there are different types of magnesium and some can cause diarrhoea, and various supplements leading to itchy skin reactions.”

 

St John’s Wort plant and capsules.

View image in fullscreen

St John’s Wort can interact with other medications. Photograph: Westend61/Alamy

 

The WCRF commissioned the survey of 795 NHS staff before Cancer Prevention Action Week, which starts on Monday.

 

Cancer specialists behind the initiative are so concerned about public misunderstanding about health that for the next three years its activities will highlight the risks posed by misinformation.

 

Steven Greenberg, the WCRF’s UK director, spoke of people who believe dubious claims about diet and supplements, including “advice that’s distorted, taken out of context or presented in a way that hides the risks”.

 

“From horse wormers to apricot kernels, which can cause serious cyanide toxicity, to everyday items like sugar and vitamin C, social media is flooded with false promises and dangerous claims about cancer prevention and cures.

 

“We are hearing from patients, nurses, GPs and oncology dietitians that this is pulling people away from the evidence-based changes to diet and lifestyle that can genuinely make a difference, while eating up precious time in NHS consultations,” he said.

 

Sharron Moffatt became a campaigner against ill-founded claims about alleged therapies to treat cancer after being diagnosed with breast cancer in 2024.

 

“After sharing my cancer diagnosis publicly I wasn’t prepared for the influx of opinions, suggestions and advice that followed,” she said. “Almost overnight people were recommending everything from special waters and supplements to products claiming to boost recovery or even cure cancer.

 

“Many of these recommendations came from a place of genuine care. Friends and family wanted to help and others had seen claims online that sounded convincing. When you’re living with cancer, you’re searching for hope and looking for anything that might improve your chances of getting better. I understood that instinct because I felt it too.

 

“But when I started asking what evidence supported some of these claims I often found there wasn’t a clear answer. Some were being promoted by influencers with huge followings. Yet when questioned, I was met with vague responses, hostility or simply no answer at all.”

 

Moffatt’s experience has taught her that, for cancer patients, “when fear is driving your decisions, the promise of a miracle cure can be incredibly tempting”, she said.

 

Rachel White, an oncology dietitian, said misinformation was a “challenging” part of her job advising cancer patients.

 

“Patients are making changes to try to improve their health and survival, but what they often do not realise is the danger or harm they can be doing instead,” she said.

 

It is now common for people with cancer to use supplements because they believe they will help them regain control over their health, she added. When discussing supplements with patients she tells them what the research evidence shows about them and talks about the risks and benefits.

 

People worried about their health should always seek advice from a qualified doctor or other specialist, a government spokesperson said, responding to the WCRF’s findings.

 

“Your health is too important to leave to social media and the internet,” the spokesperson said. “Always speak to a qualified health professional before making decisions about your diet, supplements or treatment.

 

“We expect social media platforms to act swiftly and take action against misleading health content on their platforms. If you’re concerned about something you’ve seen online, you should report it following the platform’s guidelines.”

 

The WCRF’s survey also found that many NHS staff feel ill-equipped to counteract mistaken beliefs in unorthodox therapies that patients think work, for example that eating certain “superfoods” most days or undertaking a dietary detox can reduce their cancer risk. It is urging ministers to use the forthcoming NHS long-term workforce plan for England to ensure that staff get the training and access to trustworthy resources to help them tackle the “emerging crisis of misinformation”.

(巻四)いくたびも 雪の深さを 尋ねけり (正岡子規)






7月23日木曜日
晴れ。高温多湿。朝家事は特になし。細君は美容室に出かけて、お昼ころ無事帰宅。
午後は座椅子でグタッとしていた。4時ころになりヨロヨロと出かけて亀二都住でお雪とシンちゃんにお食事を差し上げた。お雪も暑いのだろう、膝に前脚をかけたが上がっては来ず。お雪が1袋強、シンちゃんは1袋弱。
帰りに生協に寄りアイスモナカを買い、地面から熱がわき上がるなかを、かじりながら帰宅。

読む物を探していて、
NHS staff battling wave of food supplement disinformation
https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36580691/
を読んでみた。健康で長生きをしたいという助平心を読み空かされて随分と騙し取られているようだが、私はそのような物に金は遣わない。むしろ欲しいのはソクラテスがお世話になった毒ニンジンのような、静かに逝ける“サプリメント”である。
グリコーゲンのサプリメント論争も続いているようでBBCでもときどき取り上げている。
Collagen (2026 update)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002tbzx 

参考随筆
「へんな毒すごい毒 (抜書3篇)ー 田中真知」
https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/34449458/

 兎の片耳垂るる大暑かな(芥川龍之介)

願い事―ポックリ御陀仏。知らずに仏。 

昨日はブログ「随筆筆写」に45の方が訪れ、64のアクセスがあった。
トップはアクセス9で、

「いま失えば、二度と会えない人 ー 三浦哲郎」日本の名随筆31婚 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/34538035/

2位(アクセス5)は

「東京-大阪、深夜高速バスに100回ぐらい乗ってわかったこと - スズキナオ」

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32451963/

3位(アクセス4)は

「悪人礼賛 ー 中野好夫」文英堂刊 近代名作館ー評論・随筆 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/35821398/

4位(アクセス3)は

「反省なき男の - 中村伸郎」おれのことなら放つといて(ハヤカワ文庫)から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32294958/

「サザエさんの性生活 - 寺山修司」角川文庫 家出のすすめ から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32296453/

「ペットロス(親の死より悲しい) ー 井上俊」ミネルヴァ書房刊 今どきコトバ事情 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36309201/

No Sex Please, We're British

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36578284/

でした。で、Online Safety Actということで、

「公然と陳列した」に当らないとされた事例 - 成瀬幸典」 法学教室 No.448 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32295009/

を紐づけ致しました。

(巻四)冬蜂の 死にどころなく 歩きけり (村上鬼城)



7月22日水曜日
晴れ。高温多湿。朝家事は洗濯。細君が生協から戻るのと入れ替わりに猫さんたちに会いに出かけた。亀二都住2号棟の水場へ直行し、自転車置き場で涼んでいたお雪とシンちゃんが来てくれた。軽くブラッシングのあと食事。それぞれ大粒1袋弱を食べて涼しいところをお引き取りになった。セラピーの時間は15分ほど。
で、そこからリハビリ病院の売店に向かう。わずか百メートル足らずの距離だが太陽の熱と地面からの熱でクラクラとする。
リハビリ病院の売店では素朴なお母さん店員さんから百円のアイスコーヒーを買い、病院の待合室の端で涼みながら喫する。残った氷は外の花壇の端に捨てて、容器は入り口脇のビンに入れた。この夏のアイスコーヒーの正規価格は190円との由。猫さんの食事代が減っているから、まっ、いいか。
で、クラクラしながら生協に入り朝食用品ほかを買い、アイスモナカをかじりながら帰宅。

午後、駅前のドラッグストアから取り寄せをお願いしていた排水管の洗浄剤が入荷したと連絡があり、4時過ぎから引き取りに出かけた。普段はバスになんぞには乗らずに歩くのだが今日は倒れるといけないので片道230円も払ってバスに乗った。で、洗浄剤10箱、3163円を買い、ついでに日高屋で冷やし担々麵を食す。ここの冷やし中華は610円で、冷やし担々麺は750円である。アルコールは飲みたくなかったが喉が渇いていたのでホッピーの外だけをノンアルコールビールの代わりに飲んだ。ノンアルコールにもかかわらず何か酔ったような気分がするが、そのように反応してしまうのだろう。で、5時半ころ無事帰宅。

顔本に掲出される警句で、気に入った作品があると書き留めている。

昨日は
Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
が目に止まり書き留めた。

人ひとり居ない森の中で木が倒れたときに、“ドスン!”という音はするか?という哲学の問を思い出した。
BBCでは
BBC World Service - CrowdScience, If a tree falls in a forest does it make a sound? https://share.google/FUx5j6l39YJwMM0Hg
でこの哲学の問を扱い、また
Life Scientificでも、脳科学者との対談で物理的な存在と認識との問題を扱っている。
David Eagleman on why reality is an illusion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000zlqc 
で、私にも分かりそうな文献を探して筆写読書致したがquantumの辺りで降参した。
If a Tree Falls in a Forest Does It Make a Sound?
https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36578911/

 念力のゆるめば死ぬる大暑かな(村上鬼城)


願い事―ポックリ御陀仏。知らずに仏。

 

昨日はブログ「随筆筆写」に35の方が訪れ、40のアクセスがあった。
トップはアクセス4で、

「いま失えば、二度と会えない人 ー 三浦哲郎」日本の名随筆31婚 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/34538035/

2位(アクセス3)は

「刑法 窃盗罪における占有の存否の判断 ― 慶応義塾大学教授 小池信太郎」法学教室2024年8月号

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/33961442/

「反省なき男の - 中村伸郎」おれのことなら放つといて(ハヤカワ文庫)から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32294958/

「サザエさんの性生活 - 寺山修司」角川文庫 家出のすすめ から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32296453/

「三上・三中 - 外山滋比古」ちくま文庫 思考の整理学 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32315094/

「刑法演習-大麻密輸事件-CDと未遂・既遂について - 名古屋大学齊藤彰子教授」法学教室10月号
https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32332326/

「東京-大阪、深夜高速バスに100回ぐらい乗ってわかったこと - スズキナオ」

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/32451963/

「離別、死別・・・パートナーがいない中高年こそ、マスターベーションを ― 富永喜代」女医が導く60歳からのセックス 扶桑社新書 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/33888921/

「できればもうこの世に生まれ変わりたくない ー 横尾忠則」新潮新書 運命まかせ から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36425639/

でした。で、「失う」ということで、

「ペットロス(親の死より悲しい) ー 井上俊」ミネルヴァ書房刊 今どきコトバ事情 から

https://zuihitsuhissha.exblog.jp/36309201/

を紐づけ致しました。

 

No Sex Please, We're British

No Sex Please, We're British

Words: Joe Bishop

March 2026

https://www.sirmagazine.co.uk/features/no-sex-please-we-re-british

 

 

 

7 min read

Artistic editorial illustration accompanying Sir! Magazine's essay on Britain's cultural history with erotica and censorship

Share

 

 

There was a joke, or meme as they're now called, doing the rounds a few months ago. The idea was that if a Victorian person was forced to listen to the chaotic hyperpop of a Charli XCX or 100 gecs, they would cry tears of blood, and their heads would explode. To the industrialist's mind, the squeaking production of AG Cook or Danny L Harle or whoever would simply be too much for their minds to handle. I'm not so sure this would be the case. But I do think if you showed someone born in 1847 Pornhub, OnlyFans, and the limitless, varied, on-demand choice of blue entertainment they could consume, it would instantly send them cuckoo.

 

Well, the volume might send them mad. Perhaps the content wouldn't. The dawn of photography meant that the relatively graphic Georgian sex caricaturists were out of a job, and posed photographs of sex acts were now de rigueur. There is a picture that comes to mind when imagining Victorian erotica; blurry plate photography of Rubenesque nude women, usually in some woodland setting – a snatched picture of a forest nymph. But much of the illicit, underground work was decidedly more modern: entangled group sex photos, gay men in billowing dresses proffering their tumescences at each other, inter-racial sapphic love ins – fetishism and flagellation was of course a favourite of the maniacally repressed Victorian Brit. The trade of these images was hugely popular, and, like all things society wants but can't have, proved incredibly lucrative for those who produced them.

 

“We have this habit of swinging between moral panic and regulation in this country”

— Clarissa Smith

 

As the country moved into the 20th century, a new form of puritanism began to take shape. As film began to become more common, the British Board of Film Censors (BBFC – later the British Board of Film Classification) was created to embody this burgeoning attitude of saving the public from licentious post cards, penny dreadfuls, and gin palaces. This censorship infrastructure paved the way for 1959's Obscene Publications Act, creating a mid-century pornographic environment vastly out of touch with that of our European neighbours.

 

Simon Sheridan is a writer and filmmaker, and the director of Saucy! Secrets of the British Sex Comedy. "Filmmakers and people who made TV in the 1950s and 1960s had to adhere to those rules for fear of being prosecuted," he tells me over the phone. "British films always had to tread a fine line between what was considered acceptable or obscene. The BBFC passed films with nudity if it was open to interpretation, whether they were there to turn men on or to educate. So long as you could claim context you could get away with it."

 

“I think it's always a fallacy to assume that sexual films, sex films, whatever, were only enjoyed by men because they weren't”

— Clarissa Smith

 

While Sheridan very much does not think that the British sex comedy is "pornography" with a capital P, he understands that Britain's repressionary culture around sex, and our seeming inability to take it seriously, is what made the sex comedy so popular among the booby-starved public.

 

"The film that really revolutionised British sex cinema was School for Sex (1968), set in a finishing school where women learn to ensnare men using their sexuality," he tells me. "It opened the floodgates for mixing sexual content with jokes." Then, in July of 1970, the BBFC changed the X-rating from 16 to 18, which "allowed more explicit material to be shown. That opened the floodgates to sex films and comedies." Perhaps surprisingly, the audiences of these films were a lot less monogendered than one might think. "I think it's always a fallacy to assume that sexual films, sex films, whatever, were only enjoyed by men because they weren't," Sheridan muses. "They were enjoyed by women as well. Maybe not to the same extent, of course..."

 

Sex comedies may not have been as graphic as the video nasties that came after them, but they set a certain groundwork for who the British porn protagonist would be. The archetypes of the Carry On style films would be present in the sex comedies, or as Sheridan puts it: "There'll always be a posh bird. A slutty girl. There'll be a 'MILF' – a middle-aged woman. There'd be a repressed homosexual."

 

But the archetype that really came to the fore was the working-class lad, on the job, blushing as an undersexed housewife gives him the come-on. 1974's Confessions of a Window Cleaner was the top-grossing British film that year, and Robin Askwith's Timmy Lea, a bumbling tradesman irresistible to woman, who can't believe his luck, became the model on which the British porn leading man would be based on.

 

As British porn moved into the VHS era, Mr Ben Dover became synonymous with the new age of rentable grot tapes. As his pun name suggests, Dover's films continued the tradition that the sex comedy had started, and across the decade his Ben Dover series included such classics as Buttman's Bouncin' British Babes, Ben Dover's British Butt Search and Ben Dover's English Muffins. But Dover fell, as many others did, to the long cock of the law. Even in the 1990s it was illegal to distribute "hardcore porn" (that is, penetration and the rest) and so, after a lengthy sting operation, Dover was imprisoned for four months for "publishing obscene material for gain" and "being in possession of obscene material" (as well as some good old fashioned tax fiddling).

 

At the dawn of the new millennium, the British porn trade changed. The Obscene Publications Act was no longer enforceable with the onslaught of DVDs and online videos, and so in 2000, rather perfunctorily, the distribution of "hardcore porn" (remember, that term here means penetrative sex) was legalised, though of course under anachronistically strict conditions.

 

This flurry of globalised filth meant that the jovial timbre of the British porn of yore fell by the wayside. The Yanks were steamrolling on, producing glossy sex tapes replete with a superabundance of silicon at an astonishing rate. The cheeky chappy took a fag break and didn't seem likely to return. That is until 2012, when YouPorn founder Jonathan Todd created a little faux-reality series called FakeTaxi.

 

The premise of FakeTaxi is simple: a girl gets into a black cab, an anonymous cockney driver offers a free ride for a free ride, and they get it on in the spacious carriage. A working-class man, on the job, tries his luck with a filly, joking along with her and making classically bawdy comments that verge on the childish. It was a return to the conceptual and spiritual home of British porn, and proved hugely popular, allowing Todd to sell the majority of the site to Aylo (owner of Pornhub) and launch other "Fake" franchises, including Fake Driving School, in which a ginger Scot attempts to teach busty women how to parallel park before the clothes come off.

 

So where does this character live now? One might say that the de facto leader of the British porn scene, Bonnie Blue, has traces of this identity in her personality.

 

Clarissa Smith is a Professor of Film and Media at Northumbria University. "There is a bit of that oddly British shocking the neighbours thing [with Bonnie Blue]," she tells me over a Zoom call. "I think the gangbang really is an affront to Puritan ideas."

 

Today's porn actresses are not just porn actresses; they are in effect influencers in their own right, and like all other forms of video-based digital goldrush, the output has to be healthy, the content diverse, the personality popping. Many OnlyFans models have branched out into, among other things, podcasting, stand-up comedy and football mascotry. "I think working in adult content has always required people to be multitaskers, we wouldn't have talked about them as gig workers or content providers before in quite the way that we do now," says Smith.

 

"OnlyFans really highlights just how much work is involved in being a performer, that actually, it isn't just that constant refrain of 'oh, these women aren't doing very much, all they do is take their clothes off', as if there's nothing else that's involved in performing sexiness for a paying audience."

 

The recent Online Safety Act – essentially requiring you to provide a form of ID verification before you can ogle a mattress actor – is a spiritual successor of the Obscene Publications Act, and once again brings to light the constant struggle between Britain's Puritan surveillance culture, and its deep-seeded desire for muck. And it's hurting creators. "We have this habit of swinging between moral panic and regulation in this country. And it's always repeating old patterns, right?" says Smith. "So, the Online Safety Act is doing the same thing. It says it wants to protect people while at the same time, ignoring entirely the voices of the people who are likely to be most affected by it."

 

"There has not been one element of review of what's going on in pornography, in the UK, at least, that has involved any of the people who are mostly affected by any regulation that gets brought in, to my knowledge. Not one of the panels that get set up has a member of the sex worker community on it – but there's religious organisations, of course."

 

It feels as if Britain will always be in a constant boxing match with our priggish lawmakers, themselves often historically embroiled in seedy scandals of their own, and the populace who are desperate to liberate themselves from the Puritanical confines of their motherland. As history tells us, as with other crusades against the human need to feel something, laws can never overcome desire. The Online Safety Act is just another attempt at the UK to hide its erection in its waistband.

If a Tree Falls in a Forest Does It Make a Sound?

If a Tree Falls in a Forest Does It Make a Sound? (And Why This Ridiculous Question Actually Matters)

Stoic Fundamentals

https://www.stoichandbook.co/if-a-tree-falls-in-a-forest-does-it-make-a-sound-and-why-this-ridiculous-question-actually-matters/

 

 

Here's a question that's been annoying philosophy students, quantum physicists, and stoned college kids for centuries:

 

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

 

 

Your first instinct is probably to roll your eyes. Of course it makes a sound, right? Trees don't give a damn whether we're watching. Physics doesn't wait for an audience. Sound waves don't check for attendance before vibrating through the air.

 

But hold on.

 

Because this seemingly absurd question—which traces back to 18th-century philosopher George Berkeley—isn't just philosophical navel-gazing. It's actually a mind-bending gateway into some of the deepest questions about reality, consciousness, and what it means to exist.

 

And weirdly enough, it's more relevant today than ever before. Because in our social media age where everything is performed for an audience, this ancient riddle has become our lived experience: If you did something amazing but no one saw it, did it really happen?

 

Let's dig in.

 

The Problem With Sound (It's Not What You Think)

 

Here's where this gets interesting.

 

The entire "if a tree falls in the forest" debate hinges on one sneaky little word: sound.

 

See, "sound" can mean two completely different things:

 

1, Physical vibrations - Air pressure waves created when the tree crashes to the ground. These are measurable, objective, and exist whether anyone hears them or not.

2, The experience of hearing - The subjective sensation that happens when those waves hit your eardrum, vibrate tiny bones in your ear, and get translated by your brain into what we call "sound."

 

Without a perceiver—no ears, no brain, no consciousness—you've got vibrations. But do you have sound?

 

This isn't just semantics. It's the difference between believing reality exists independently of observation (realism) and believing reality is fundamentally tied to consciousness (idealism).

 

And this is where shit gets philosophical.

 

KEY INSIGHT

 

"Sound" has two completely different meanings:Physical vibrations (objective, always exist)The experience of hearing (subjective, requires a perceiver)

The entire debate hinges on which definition you use.

 

 

George Berkeley's Mind-Bending Claim

 

George Berkeley, the Irish philosopher who sparked this whole debate in 1710, wasn't messing around. His big idea was radical: objects only exist when they're perceived.

 

In his Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Berkeley argued that houses, mountains, rivers—and yes, trees—exist only as ideas in the perceiver's mind. He coined the phrase "esse est percipi"—to be is to be perceived.

 

Which means: no observer, no reality.

 

This sounds insane at first. Like, obviously the tree exists even when I'm not looking at it, right?

 

But Berkeley would push back:

 

"How do you know? Have you ever experienced anything that wasn't being experienced by you? Everything you've ever known about reality has come through your perception. So how can you prove anything exists when nobody's perceiving it?"

 

It's the philosophical equivalent of "pics or it didn't happen."

 

BERKELEY'S CHALLENGE

 

"Have you ever experienced anything that wasn't being experienced by you? Everything you've ever known about reality has come through YOUR perception. So how can you prove anything exists when nobody's perceiving it?"

 

Try to answer this without using circular reasoning. I'll wait.

 

 

Now, I know what you're thinking: this is the kind of thing that makes people hate philosophy. But stick with me—because this question has echoed through centuries of thought, from Immanuel Kant to modern quantum mechanics, and it touches something profound about how we understand existence.

 

"To be is to be perceived." — George Berkeley