Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Would you Adam and Eve it!

World’s first carbon neutral bra.

The world’s first carbon neutral bra, made in a factory run on solar panels, has been launched onto the fashion market with hopes that all clothing will be more environmentally friendly in future.

The Marks and Spencer (M&S) lingerie set, that will be available online, was made in an ‘eco factory’ in Sri Lanka where energy has been reduced a third through measures like making sure all lighting is from the sun or low energy light bulbs.

It is powered by hydroelectricity produced on a nearby river and solar panels on the roof.

The rest of the carbon dioxide produced in making the bra will be offset by planting 6,000 trees in the community every year. Most of the trees will be native to Sri Lanka, therefore boosting wildlife. A quarter will be fruit trees that can generate money for the local community.

The Carbon Trust Footprinting Certification Company has calculated the carbon used in making the bra and will monitor the project to ensure emissions are cut.

Jesus fucking wept.

The scheme will also help wildlife. Sri Lanka’s forests are home to approximately 90 per cent of the country’s endemic species but are disappearing at a rate of 1.6 per cent per year.

M&S are working with the Conservation Carbon Company to help local farmers replant trees so that what is left of the rainforest in southern Sri Lanka can be reconnected again via ‘green corridors’. This allows wildlife such as the slender loris and green vine snake to move around. The local farmers are helped to develop sustainable agriculture harvesting fruit and timber.

Mike Barry, Head of Sustainable Business at M&S, said the retailer will be trying to make more clothing carbon neutral in future and expecting other companies to follow suite.

“We don’t want green, eco-friendly products to be in a ghetto in the corner, we should be making all products more environmentally friendly,” he said.

I honestly don’t know where to start. OK, start simple Nick and work up to the Götterdämmerung. First off the lass on the right – that don’t work. She’s way too buxom for a strapless number. OK, got that off my er… chest. The sad truth I was trying to avoid is that it will find buyers.

How do I know that? Because I’ve met the sort of people who would buy that sort of thing. I once had a flatmate called Martin. Martin was a twat. Sorry, Mart but there is no other way of putting it. He was very Green. He was so Green that he sent off for the Green party manifesto and then didn’t read it. I did. So did the rest of our flat and we concluded (this was c.1996) that whilst hitherto we’d regarded Greens as lentil boiling socks’n'sandals cranks they were actually extremely nasty. As I said Mart didn’t read it and in the end it was recycled which is fitting in a sense.

Now Mart wasn’t a hit with the ladies. I once saw him come out of the bathroom starkers but for a towel wrapped around his organs of generation and elimination. Another of my flatmates said, “Oi, Sabu the elephant-boy!” He was the spitting double of Mowgli despite being white British and from near Sheffield (which is nothing to be proud about). Anyway we must now enter stage-left a Canadian. Jamie was a nice guy. He was from Vancouver. He had a cavalcade of Canucks dossing on his floor. First was The Noah and then The Gayle. For some reason these West Coast Canucks felt the need to address each other using the definite article – a night on the Stella with The Jamie was a most excellent adventure if you catch my drift. The Noah was a sound chap who stood his round and could usually be found, “Watching the game (it didn’t matter what) having a beer” but The Gayle was something else…

I have no idea what form of financial support the friends of Jamie had. In short I basically have no freaking idea what they did or where the money came from. The Noah was a sort of force of nature. The Gayle was nature. Shortly before pitching-up in London she had spent six months living in a treehouse in British Columbia protesting about something. Anyway Green Mart was smitten from first sight. Utterly. He got nowhere of course despite cooking her a vegan curry to general derision. Now don’t get me wrong here. My wife is vegan but veganism is not the point. It was the procession of the vegetables that caused the derision. These involved a “baby aubergine”. Apparently The Gayle said, “Oh isn’t it so cute, can I hold it?” (she spoke entirely in italics all the fucking time) I wasn’t there but my flattie Sid told me afterwards. I’m glad I wasn’t there because I’d probably have lost control of various bodily functions that are not the done thing to lose control of in company. Certainly not in front of Canadians. I’m English. I have standards.

So, my point is if this silliness from M&S had been on the market back when Mart was trying to seduce The Gayle it is exactly the sort of thing he would have bought her. Maybe then he would have got at least tops and fingers. As it was he got fuck all. Not even a kiss. After having known The Gayle for 48 hours though he did tell me (this was just after the aubergine incident) that she, “Was the most important woman he’d ever met, ever”. You see, he saw life through a different lens. Most don’t pretend sexual attractiveness is something it isn’t but not Mart. He saw attractiveness purely in terms of righteousness rather than the thing in itself. Now show me a picture of Dita von Teese in the nip and I’m like “Yeah!”. Show Mart the same picture and he’d probably mumble something about it being “exploitative” and then shamble off to his room for a wank. But if you made some pony up about how Ms von Teese’s burlesque shows were “carbon-neutral” the likes of Mart would wax lyrical – and then also go off for a wank. But a righteous wank this time.

But forget about Mart! And Dita, alas! I must here air my Unified Field Theory of Frilly Things. Most things are sold as commodities in a sense. A litre of milk costs more than half a litre. This does not apply to underwear. Imagine it’s December 23rd and you are in Central Manchester and you have to buy a Crimble prezzie for the missus. Underwear always works. Now you can spend a lot at Harvey Nicks or Selfridges on “Love, Kylie” or “Elle MacPherson ‘Intimates’” or you can buy five panties for a tenner at Primark. One of those paths is a false economy. One of those will have you kipping on the sofa ’till Easter if you are fucking lucky. My point here is that lingerie is an inverse commodity. The more you pay the less (by mass) you tend to get. It is not at all like pig iron or pork bellies (thank God!). So on the general assumption that in terms of carbon footprint and resource depletion and all that jazz then the more expensive the underwear the better surely? On every count! For the planet, for the prospect of a blow-job, for not sleeping on the sofa for months! And surely getting divorced is a hell of a thing for your carbon footprint.

But that’s my take. Mart probably has a different one. And next Winterval some “lucky” lady will unwrap her carbon neutral knickers and bra and swoon before engaging in deeply unfulfilling sex with the miserable sod. And he was a miserable sod and a hypocrite. The only shag he got that year was with another of my homies – Alison. Subsequently I got to know Alison quite well. After a few drinkies we got to talking about our shag lists. She rated herself as as 3/2*. “A half!” I ejaculated. “Yeah, that was Martin, you couldn’t exactly call that sex!” No, I guess not seeing as he was the sort of bloke who tented his pants over a dimwitted Canuck who wanted to carry a baby aubergine from flat 32 to flat 24.

Last I heard Sid and Alison were happily living together in North London and she was a corporate lawyer and he was an oil engineer. I, inadvertently, almost ended that but the tale of the Canadian ribbed condom can keep. That was yet another Canadian for a start. The gaff was wick with moose-fuckers. We used to play poker and I still find fucking Canadian cents in my penny jar 15 years later.

So how did Mart get to 1/2 Alison? They were both Brahms and Liszt and he chatted her up on the basis purely that she was a vegetarian. He only later found out she also voted Tory… This amused Alison enormously. Mart simply couldn’t get his head around the idea that a vegetarian could be relatively “right wing”. I guess he should have met Hitler – they would have got on like a house on fire. Both being leftie beyond comprehension.

But there is a condom story I have to tell. And it hales from York and not Vancouver. Mart showed me his stash of johnnies (no, not like that – he was straight) but in a spirit of “chappishness”. You know where he got ‘em from? Ensure you are near a toilet now. They were a parting gift from his ex-girlfriend from York. Now I’ve had exs and by and large the parting gift is X-rated lingo both ways and not accessories for your future conquests. Real people break-up with foul language. Mart broke up with condoms. If I live to 113 I will not understand that.

But it is exactly the mentality of the buyer of carbon neutral bras. Exactly. It is about being terribly liberal about sex by not exactly being genuinely liberal but taking the easy route which is thinking it just doesn’t matter. That it is just something us carbon-neutral animals can’t help ourselves from doing.

And that is not the way I look at it. I’m pretty liberal on the shagging but only because I know it can mean more than the world just in and of itself. Things don’t have to be defined to matter. And when I take off my wife’s bra I do not care about the carbon neutrality. I am not Mart. He’d get the righteous horn (though I am told he is hung like a Chinese mouse) if it was a “carbon-neutral bra” but me? Me! I just like tits. And whilst for shopping purposes I know what her technical size is but for groping purposes I think in terms of old money and the utterly “carbon whatever” that is the BSH – The British Standard Handful. I like tits. I’m a non-gay bloke. Do I have to explain? Moreover if I had to think like that I would have the pitiful hit rate of Martin. I have seen (and handled) some beautiful breasts in my time. I have never got my paws on “carbon neutral” ones because a slap in the face generally brings sexual antics to a halt. Clue one is that if you get a girl’s bra off then you have arrived! By definition they gotta be exceptional or you are wasting your time and you wouldn’t want to do that! The same applies to lesbians. I mean real lesbians who like girls and not lezzas who are doing it as a deranged political statement. I like lesbians. I have actually had sex with at least one. She regarded the Guardian as right-wing but she had great tits and really good dope so I forgave her for it.

And she had the tightest cunny parts of any chaos theorist I ever shagged. (Un)fortunately that places her in a set of one.

I guess I now have to go and knit my wife some knickers out of grass and then make up a bed on the sofa.

Rejected post titles include: “Titiful!”, “Titter ye not!” and “Penny Bizarre”.

*I’m a physicist by training so I use vulgar fractions.

20 Comments

  1. Lynne says:

    That bra is underwired which means it has either metal or plastic support stays. It also has metal hooks and eyes. Last I heard, the production of these materials is not, and never has been, “carbon” neutral which means this is nothing but a cynical PR stunt. So Marks can fuck right off from now on. I’m sick of this bullshit about “carbon” footprints and CAGW mitigation. I’ll buy my boob cages and fanny hammocks elsewhere.

  2. PeterT says:

    I work for a major professional services company. We recently had a booklet plonked on our desks. I forget what it was called exactly, but it was something like ‘the good life’ or the ‘good company’ or something. On the back page we were informed that it had been printed on recycled ‘post consumer’ paper on mills powered by windfarms. Good grief what is the world coming to? Made me want to move to a smaller company. That and all the other corporate bullshit.

  3. Sam Duncan says:

    I’ve had it up to here* with Marks & Sparks. When did they start to play muzak, by the way? They never used to play muzak. And their stuff isn’t even all that good these days, anyway. John Lewis pisses all over them. And although JL used to be vastly more irritating, being a sort of co-op and all (you can’t be a “partnership” with several thousand partners, so don’t come that crap with me), M&S has overtaken it, lapped it several times, finished the race, and is now back home eating its locally-sourced carbon-neutral organic low-sodium dinner.

    *A point roughly midway up my forhead, since hand gestures don’t come over too well in blog comments.

  4. Laird says:

    I think the lady on the right looks just fine, thank you very much, straps or no.

  5. Locke says:

    Well, that was incredibly vulgar.

    However, I think you’ve identified one of the key weaknesses of the radical left with this paragraph.

    “It is about being terribly liberal about sex by not exactly being genuinely liberal but taking the easy route which is thinking it just doesn’t matter. That it is just something us carbon-neutral animals can’t help ourselves from doing. ”

    If sex mattered, wouldn’t the left have to do something about it? The entire current justification for the left’s policies on reducing inequality is that inequality has a damaging psychological effect on individuals and does unpleasant things to society.

    But what about inequality of sexual experience or personal relationships generally? Men tend to be far more jealous of a big titted girlfriend than a rolex. Women tend to worry more about another woman being younger and better able to attract men than they do about the car they drive. I’d hazard a guess that the number of murders (and suicides) related to personal jealousies dwarfs the number related to inequalities of wealth or consumption.

    So why do so many on the radical left strongly advocate the “free sexual marketplace”?
    In my opinion, the Marts of this world are dupes for revolutionaries seeking to shift the balance of power in their favour, break down the old social structures for their own benefit. Words like “equality” are a smoke screen for these selfish efforts. The only way the dupes can cope with the cognitive dissonance is to pretend that sex is entirely unimportant.

    My two cents – sex’s importance is much the same as that of food, pride, friendship, most things – subject to diminishing marginal utility. Establishing a basic minimum is more important than worrying about the outliers, because large quantities of money don’t actually mean anything as long as peoples basic rights are protected.
    I’d say exactly the same for sex – we should be seeking to promote a social system which provides the most people with a basic decent level of sex and companionship. We should be worried more about Mart (Locke) not getting laid than we should either about peoples right to get laid lots or comparing ourselves to others.
    Traditional nuclear family rules, ok?

    I look forward to the day when sex maniacs like Nick, the incredibly rich and other gluttons are viewed as harmless eccentrics rather than our lord and masters to be worshiped or overthrown.

  6. JuliaM says:

    “First off the lass on the right – that don’t work. She’s way too buxom for a strapless number.”

    It’ll work just fine. As long as she doesn’t want to move around… :)

  7. JuliaM says:

    “Men tend to be far more jealous of a big titted girlfriend than a rolex. Women tend to worry more about another woman being younger and better able to attract men than they do about the car they drive.”

    It would appear that Locke thinks everyone is exactly the same, all conforming to the same standards and specifications.

    You do know that’s why socialism, marxism and all the other -isms the left so loves don’t work, don’t you?

  8. NickM says:

    “On the back page we were informed that it had been printed on recycled ‘post consumer’ paper on mills powered by windfarms.”

    I’ll tell ya something. What was the name of the cheapo MS desktop publishing software. OK, it had for some reason sample documents including patterns for paper planes. So I print one off. Now due to some sort of cock-up between A4 and US paper sizes the fucker fed two sheets the second one just had the recycling symbol and a message telling you to recycle after having fun with your plane. Now if it hadn’t had that only one sheet would have been needed. I almost thought bugger this theatrical gayness – I’m buying a Mac!

    Rolexs.
    Odd aren’t they? Nobody actually likes them but everyone acknowledges them as a status symbol. Basically they say I’m a twat but a very rich twat. I have no idea how they compare price-wise with say a Breitling or Jaeger Le Coultre but they are utterly vulgar. More vulgar even than my posting. But then I think Locke has a cart/horse misalignment. The only reason whatsoever to own a Rolex is to score with girls who look like a dead heat in a Zeppelin race. They have no other purpose. I mean I suppose they tell the time but so does my Omega Speedmaster and so does my Casio. I suppose I ought to confront the question of tittage. I’m more of an ass man to be honest but tits are cool too. I know this is going to sound extraordinarily righteous but honestly I go for intellect, humour and character more than any look which is why my sexual conquests are kinda various in appearance. I think having a physical “type” is extremely shallow which is sort of what I think Julia was getting at.

    Sam,
    JLP or M&S or anything over the Co-op who are the most self-righteous collection of arseholes on the planet. The point about JL and it’s partnership is… Well you know most shop-lifting is done by shop-workers. Not in JLs. I quite like the way they are run.

  9. Locke says:

    JuliaM – “tend”, dear. “tend”.

    But, yes, I do think that people’s basic make up is fairly similar – 2 arms, 2 legs, sex drive, need to be loved/ respected etc – it’s only because other people are so important to us that we obsess over the relatively small differences.
    In this case, obviously people have various ideas – some people might think that a rolex will serve as a clear sign of their status and win them respect – but while the desire for respect is common, the idea that rolex= respect relies rather tenuously on a particular set of ideas, which in my experience, most people in modern Britain simply don’t share to any great degree. And if the majority of people don’t share the idea, then the value of the rolex goes down.
    Obviously, “big tit girlfriend” = respect, while still just an idea, is at least based on something more primitive and common – the sex drive. Not everyone shares that drive… hence the “tend”.
    To put it another way, for most men, big tits are better than gold. Which makes sense.

    And, socialism doesn’t work because people have different ideas? Couldn’t the same thing be said of any ideology?

  10. Locke says:

    Right…. yes… not everyone likes big tits… but almost everyone likes sex, which was what I was trying to say.

  11. Kevin B says:

    No bloke is trying to impress the birds with his Rolex, or his McClaren F1 or his Gulfstream. He’s trying to impress his peers. He’s even pulling the birds to impress his peers. He’s basically shouting: “Look at the size of my prick you pencil dicks!”

    And, for a certain peer group, that works a treat. Otherwise Lamborghini would be in the tractor business and James Bond wouldn’t even have been a figment of Ian Fleming’s imagination.

    For other peer groups, wearing your baseball cap backwards and your cargo pants round your arse is the thing.

    It’s terribly pollitally incorrect to say so, but for most adolescent males, (up to and including Bernie Eccelstone), birds are just another toy to impress the mates. It’s not until maturity, usually involving a couple of kids, that many males actually begin to see females as human beings.

  12. PeterT says:

    I have a mate in the Rolex brigade (actually I think Rolex do some pretty nice watches – but the nicer ones also tend to be the cheaper ones – which works for me! Its the expensive ones that look horrible). He’s come up with some unintentionally classic one liners. When I’ve inquired about the current state of his romantic life I have had the following responses:

    “I’ve started preferring more intellectual women, you know; chicks that wear glasses”

    and my favourite,

    “I’ve been dating some high profile women recently, there was a page 3 model for example”

    [to the yanks..page 3 is the page of our largest tabloid that shows a different topless beauty every day]

  13. Mr Ecks says:

    It’s all going tits up for the Greens.

  14. dfwmtx says:

    Women aren’t attracted to guys who are politically-correct. I found this out, and I lament at all the cute girls I could’ve dated and possibly done more with in college had I been the evil & happy capitalist I am now.

    How long till carbon-neutral underwear needs to be subsidized by the government because no one is buying it (for various reasons, like “is itchy”, “poorly made”, “I can’t wash the hippie stench out”, etc)?

  15. Philip Scott Thomas says:

    To the contrary, Nick. Hurrah for M&S. They have identified a market niche and are exploiting it. Well done them. That’s good old capitalism.

    If some yoghurt knitter is stupid enough to buy them then more fool them. A fool and his money, etc.

  16. EndivioR says:

    As far as I’m concerned the most ecologically sound way of shaping and supporting mammaries is that referenced in the picture accompanying this news item. The advantage of hands as I understand it is that they last much longer than bras, are more versatile, adaptable and accommodating with respect to size differences, and do not normally have bits of wire poking out. I’ll leave those with experience to list the disadvantages.

    BTW, the picture was actually an electoral poster for the Ciutadella Democratic Party candidate in Menorca – until the left wing puritans insisted it be taken down, on what pretext the article does not clearly explain.

  17. Kevin B says:

    Endivio, did the actual poster show her face or were people expected to recognize the candidate from the …err… bust view so to speak?

  18. Sam Duncan says:

    “I think the lady on the right looks just fine, thank you very much, straps or no.”

    I concur, for what it’s worth. The blonde looks like exactly the miserable type who’d go for carbon-neutral smalls.

    “I’m more of an ass man to be honest but tits are cool too. I know this is going to sound extraordinarily righteous but honestly I go for intellect, humour and character more than any look which is why my sexual conquests are kinda various in appearance.”

    I completely agree. Which is probably why my sexual conquests are so few in number: anyone with any brains wouldn’t go near me with a bargepole. Boom, boom.

    Funny thing is, this appreciation for the well-turned bottom has sort of crept up on me over the last decade or so. I never used to pay them much attention, really. Odd.

  19. EndivioR says:

    “did the actual poster show her face”

    I canna rightly say. However, I found the following quote from the article inspiring:

    “I do what I please with my tits and have no reason to hide them. If it is an insult to show off the chest, well, people will just have to put up with it – I have no reason to cover myself up. We are not in the Inquisition.”

  20. Sunfish says:

    Divorce did wonders for my carbon footprint. No more air travel to visit the inlaws, or keeping the thermostat at 77.

    As for the other thing: Anthony Ray says most of what’s to be said.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: