[jhb_airlines] Re: Security!

  • From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:08:19 +0100


You underestimate the complexity of the situation!

To cover equatorial swings, I have trousers in two waist sizes. We're away again in January. That gives me 15 weeks to get my weight down by a stone, so that the smaller waist sizes will fit. Not too difficult a task, it may seem, since that equates to a weight loss of only one pound per week. We'll gloss over the delicious cheese twist that tended to offset my soup only, lunch regime, a few hours ago. Naturally, I'll be getting down to the job in earnest tomorrow.

Once able to get into the smaller waist sizes, we start a holiday where the 5 star food is included in the price. It would be economic lunacy to stay on a diet under those conditions. For that reason I anticipate the problem and travel with the larger waist sizes also, so that I'm adequately prepared.

There's some logic in your suggestion of elasticated waist bands but once started on that slope, it begs the question why get my weight down in the first place.

I'll not dwell on the kilt, since we've never been big on cross dressing, in my family. I'm not of course criticising any tendencies that you yourself may have, in that area. Live and let live is wot I always say.

I suppose the easy solution would be to switch to braces, though they do tend to give one the sort of faux working class look that's best left to Guardian readers and those with no ambitions to get on in a Labour government. There is, of course, the possibillity of wearing braces beneath my shirt, though that may necessitate cutting slits in the shirts, so that the buttonholed straps may emerge to mate up with the buttons. Perhaps just a tad too much of the John Major about that one. And I was never really turned on by Edwina Curry.

Still, fair play, you have given me a couple of options to mull over. The list never fails to rise to the occasion.

In passing, I must keep in good books on this list, since there seems to be a distinct possibillity I might find myself removed from an American Bikers list. Yesterday I was set back by the response to a request on the best bike to buy, sent in by a 64 year old strippling. The response pointed out that he needs to make sure he's buying the correct bike, since the fact that he's 64 means it will almost certainly be his last!

I replied, quite diplomatically, saying that I thought the reply had been rather pessimistic and life does continue beyond 64.

This produced a pompous and rather aggressive response that declining health was a fact of life. That the chap might buy the bike and soon find it was too heavy for him. He spoke as someone who was just passing 50 and already had a stiff shoulder. I was accused of ignoring the facts of life, with my personal decline just around the corner. What would happen, he asked, if the 64 year old's bike fell over and he was unable to lift it up.

I replied that since passing 64 I'd had a bypass, a CBR600, a VFR800, a BMW, an arthritic neck, a Bonnie and a Kawasaki cruiser. If my bike fell over I wouldn't be too proud to seek help in picking it up.

If, on the other hand, I took his advice and gave up now, then found I was still fit at 95, I wouldn't be able to escape the feeling that I'd been a total pratt, in giving up what I couldn't get back.

I haven't had a reply. That may mean he's mulling over my argument. It's much more likely to mean I've been banned.

All this from the land of John Wayne and True Grit!

Gerry Winskill

Mike Lucas wrote:

Have you considered getting a pair of trousers with built-in adjustment at the sides instead of a belt? Or you could eat more and put on some weight so that a belt is no longer required ... (I hesitate to suggest the third option - to buy trousers with a smaller waist size).

I was also thinking "kilt" but decided not to go there ...

Mike L

Gerry Winskill wrote:
With the prospect of being dragged away on holiday, again, looming large, I'm trying to design out some of the hassle.

Previous trips have shown I'm incapable of passing through a security screening device without being sidelined for a search. Initially I thought it was because of the wire that holds parts of me together. Sadly, it's less exotic than that and probably triggered by belt buckles. Against that theory goes the fact that all the men who don't trigger alarms can't be holding their trousers up only with braces or sellotape.

So, is there a non metallic belt buckle, perhaps, that I've overlooked?
I've done a Yahoo search but that just seems to turn up sites that would like to sell me the detector.

It's bad enough starting a trip, at Ronaldsway, clutching my shoes in one hand. If I have to hold my belt-less trousers up with the other, how do I recover my valuables, when they emerge from the microwave?

The only easy solution seems to be not to travel but I've tried that and bear the scars to show I failed.

The Yahoo search wasn't entirely wasted. One unearthed solution has brightened my day. On reflection, though, I don't think the best solution is a chocolate belt buckle.....

Gerry Winskill

Other related posts: