or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › What's the stereotype of a New Jersey Girl?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's the stereotype of a New Jersey Girl? - Page 9

post #121 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by romafan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiger02
May well have been me, and I stand by it. If I've never seen a mountain, then you've never tried to hike Mt Marcy. Tougher hike than Whitney, and it's not really close. Whitney is a long walk; Marcy is a short walk without switchbacks.

You guys are just proving my point! Tom, if we're just talking difficulty, we can make a 500 foot cylindrical mound of crumbling sandstone at an 85 degree grade and none of us will ever make it up... I'm talking about size, majesty, and a real, live, flat-out mountain range. New York has hills. Some big hills, some tough hills, but they're still hills.
post #122 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouji View Post
Some parts of London have great architecture, of what has been mentioned, Chelsea actually has quite poor architecture, as does most of Knightsbridge, Marylebone and Mayfair.
Belgravia is very nice, most of Holland Park is also, but it's only just in 'real' London.
Kensington is very so so in my opinion.
If I were to rank London's areas in terms of architectural quality, it would be as follows:
1. Belgravia
2. Regent's Park
3. Little Venice / Maida Vale
4. St. John's Wood
5. The City
6. Holland Park
7. The south east of Marylebone
8. Canary Wharf
9. Hampstead
10. South Kensington
11. (Architecturally) generic areas (Bayswater, Mayfair, Paddington, Notting Hill, Belsize Park, Most of Kensington, Earl's Court, Fulham, Ealing etc.)

To say Chelsea or has nice architecture confuses me. Sure it is a nice area, but architecture? It is simply a mix of very bad 60s architecture and London's generic architectural style.

And these are the top 10 - I lived in areas that were much more unattractive than even South Kensington. I spent a year in Vauxhall near the Oval - dreadful; a year in Battersea - nice park but architectural desert (besides Foster's offices). Not to mention Clapham, Brixton or most of the northern neighborhoods (King's Cross, Farrigndon... yuck)

A lot of London's architecture was rebuilt after the war and most neighborhoods are truly depressing archi-wise. Not to mention the traffic planning which makes most of London a nightmare for pedestrians (ah how much I hated these subterrean passages to cross 6 lane roads...)
post #123 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saucemaster View Post
You guys are just proving my point! Tom, if we're just talking difficulty, we can make a 500 foot cylindrical mound of crumbling sandstone at an 85 degree grade and none of us will ever make it up... I'm talking about size, majesty, and a real, live, flat-out mountain range. New York has hills. Some big hills, some tough hills, but they're still hills.
This is a mountain. 5700 feet is a hill.
post #124 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post
And these are the top 10 - I lived in areas that were much more unattractive than even South Kensington. I spent a year in Vauxhall near the Oval - dreadful; a year in Battersea - nice park but architectural desert (besides Foster's offices). Not to mention Clapham, Brixton or most of the northern neighborhoods (King's Cross, Farrigndon... yuck)

Yeah, but now that you're here, how much time do you spend in Soundview, Battery Park City, the East 20s East of 3rd, Canarsie, Tod Hill, Jamaica, the Lower East Side, Long Island City?
post #125 of 210
Come on fellas, no love for Brick City?




post #126 of 210
California and everything within it, sucks. If California sunk tomorrow, what would we miss? Overpriced mediocre wine and gangs? Smog? Gay porn? California is responsible for Kevin Costner, California Rolls and Scientology. I say, lets nuke it.
post #127 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
If California sunk tomorrow, what would we miss?

The Internet, among other things. No more Style Forum.

And don't forget straight porn, 99% of which is made in Chatsworth.
post #128 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
California and everything within it, sucks. If California sunk tomorrow, what would we miss? Overpriced mediocre wine and gangs? Smog? Gay porn? California is responsible for Kevin Costner, California Rolls and Scientology. I say, lets nuke it.

THAT's what I was waiting for. Finally.
post #129 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post
The Internet, among other things. No more Style Forum.

And don't forget straight porn, 99% of which is made in Chatsworth.

No biggie, Al Gore isn't doing anything so he can rassle us up another internet posthaste.

I live straight porn so I wouldn't miss it.
post #130 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
I live straight porn so I wouldn't miss it.
But you would miss gay porn. Telling.

Take it away, Conne!
post #131 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post
And these are the top 10 - I lived in areas that were much more unattractive than even South Kensington. I spent a year in Vauxhall near the Oval - dreadful; a year in Battersea - nice park but architectural desert (besides Foster's offices). Not to mention Clapham, Brixton or most of the northern neighborhoods (King's Cross, Farrigndon... yuck)

I agree. Those places are pretty architecturally drab.
Although, I would question 'most' of the northern neighbourhoods, King's Cross station, St. Pancreas Station and the British Library more than make up for the few poor buildings in the area. Sure it's not a nice area to live (I actually doubt there is muh housing in the area anyway), but I don't think it looks bad.
Farringdon is the same architectural style as Mayfair and Marylebone, it's just not maintained very well.
I think you would be very hard pressed to find architecture in North London as bad as South London.
post #132 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
California and everything within it, sucks. If California sunk tomorrow, what would we miss? Overpriced mediocre wine and gangs? Smog? Gay porn? California is responsible for Kevin Costner, California Rolls and Scientology. I say, lets nuke it.
Budapest got your back on this one man, but might be difficult without the internet. Edit: err, the straight porn part. Damn reading comprehension. Justin: watch it sucker. The Appalaichians were the Himalayas before the Sierra Nevada was a cheap knockoff of the Alps. Uphill both ways in the snow, back in their day. Good luck finding ice-skiing in the west!
post #133 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiger02 View Post
Justin: watch it sucker. The Appalaichians were the Himalayas before the Sierra Nevada was a cheap knockoff of the Alps. Uphill both ways in the snow, back in their day.

Good luck finding ice-skiing in the west!

You keep comforting yourself with ancient history. I'm going to be over here, living in the present.
post #134 of 210
And I'm going to be over here, living your wet dream. I'll take that
post #135 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiger02 View Post


Justin: watch it sucker. The Appalaichians were the Himalayas before the Sierra Nevada was a cheap knockoff of the Alps. Uphill both ways in the snow, back in their day.

Just to be clear on this, since I know you east coat people don't get a great education, but the Sierras were where people had to eat their own family members to survive, while the Appalachians are where people fuck their own family members both for fun and procreation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › What's the stereotype of a New Jersey Girl?