NPR

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:55 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:52 pm 95% of work place deaths are male.

https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/fatals.htm

100% of deaths in labour are female

Overwhelmed by the number of emails and messages from voters concerned about "phantom" or super-anonymous Reform UK candidates.

Will try and get back to as many as possible - and watch this space on @BylineTimes in the coming days...

Alex Andreou:
"Nigel Farage's register of interests must be submitted every month, he's going to have to declare everything".

Dorian Lynskey:
"Once it's been translated from Russian".

Insane_Homer wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:35 pm Growing reports of many phantom Reform candidates

Overwhelmed by the number of emails and messages from voters concerned about "phantom" or super-anonymous Reform UK candidates.

Will try and get back to as many as possible - and watch this space on @BylineTimes in the coming days...

Fartrage and co could be in a bit bother very soon

and

Alex Andreou:
"Nigel Farage's register of interests must be submitted every month, he's going to have to declare everything".

Dorian Lynskey:
"Once it's been translated from Russian".

Insane_Homer wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:35 pm Growing reports of many phantom Reform candidates

Overwhelmed by the number of emails and messages from voters concerned about "phantom" or super-anonymous Reform UK candidates.

Will try and get back to as many as possible - and watch this space on @BylineTimes in the coming days...

Fartrage and co could be in a bit bother very soon

and

Alex Andreou:
"Nigel Farage's register of interests must be submitted every month, he's going to have to declare everything".

Dorian Lynskey:
"Once it's been translated from Russian".

Raggs wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:36 pm
Just trying to work out what the hell the outcome of such a scandal would be...

Re-run each election surely? Or only those where the number of votes was big enough to push another party over the line?

And hopefully Farage arrested.

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:35 pm

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:55 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:52 pm 95% of work place deaths are male.

https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/fatals.htm

100% of deaths in labour are female

Not quite sure that makes the point that you think it’s making.

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:17 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:35 pm

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:55 pm

100% of deaths in labour are female

Not quite sure that makes the point that you think it’s making.

tbh I don’t really understand the point you’re making.

If more men are farmers, fishermen and site workers there’s going to be more of them dying.

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

Paddington Bear wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:54 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

Hang on - are you saying that workplaces dominated by one gender tend to exhibit traits that are more common within that gender?!?!?

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 7:04 am

Paddington Bear wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:54 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

Hang on - are you saying that workplaces dominated by one gender tend to exhibit traits that are more common within that gender?!?!?

And that different outcomes are influenced by the choices made by that cohort.

Edited to soften the language.

Tichtheid wrote: Fri Jul 05, 2024 7:54 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: Fri Jul 05, 2024 7:37 pm

salanya wrote: Fri Jul 05, 2024 6:34 pm

Okay, I'll bite: what is supposed to be a 'female coded society' ?
I appreciate modern society isn't as focused on the men being dominant, and it might be more 'woke', but how is that coded for/by females?
It may be harder for many men to work out their role and identity in these modern times, but to label society as 'female coded', you create half of the issue.

Paddington mentioned school in there. My direct and vicarious experience as a young male teacher was that female teachers just won't allow boys the same behavioural latitude that male teachers will. They're very quick to clamp down on harmless rough-housing between friends or general boistrousness.

The school I worked at had dedicated STEM programs for the girls, but not the boys. They had dedicated assemblies on (or around if the dates didn't fit) international women's day, but not international men's day. A lot more assembly time devoted to inspiring women and feminism. Which is difficult to challenge as a staff member when outnumbered.

I'm sure a lot of female students went to female teachers rather than me if they had issues they wanted to discuss, a lot of the male ones wouldn't have had a similar option because the gender balance of staff was so skewed. And even if they did go to a female teacher, they're not going to be able to dispense the same advice or understand a problem a boy brings them in the same way that a male teacher would get or propose solutions that would work with other males. Cuts the other way too. Despite best intentions I wouldn't be able to advise a girl as I would a boy, we just have very different lived, gendered experience.

People wring hands over the popularity of Andrew Tate among young men and some of the indications we're beginning to see that they skew more to the right politically, but I get it. Leaving aside whether they're right or wrong a lot of young men end up feeling like it's a woman's world and that men are being left behind, yet they frequently encounter a dominant societal narrative that refuses to acknowledge that viewpoint and tells them they remain more privileged. They often feel dismissed and belittled, so they gravitate to people and ideas that don't make them feel that way.

The differential in opportunity and outcomes is still very real, as it is for class and colour. This permeates every strand of life in the UK.

I understand the likes of Tate having a receptive audience, but that audience is not at fault here. It's a lot easier to point and scream "Wokery" than it is to tackle multi-layered problems of gender, class, race, lack of level playing fields etc.

My go-to is always the three people at a table with ten biscuits on a plate in the middle. One person reaches over and takes nine biscuits. Another reaches for the last biscuit and the first person turns to the third and says, "They're trying to steal your biscuit"

Tate and others are the useful idiots of the person with the nine biscuits.

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Uncle fester wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 7:27 amSet by the market. No shortage of brickies and farm labourers.

Uncle fester wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 7:27 am No shortage of brickies.

yermum wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 7:49 am

Uncle fester wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 7:27 am No shortage of brickies.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mar ... ckies.html

massive shortage of brickies.

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

Random1 wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:22 pm I thought we were talking about men not having it easier than women?

Dying at work is a good example

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:51 am

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Except the problem is women get paid less for doing the same jobs in pretty much every sector.

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:00 am

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:51 am

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Except the problem is women get paid less for doing the same jobs in pretty much every sector.

Do they? Last time I looked into it, it was actually pretty equal for most situations. Once other factors were taken into account (delayed career progression due to maternity leave, raising family etc), often working fewer hours for the same reason. Once all these were included, per hours per experience etc it was actually fairly close. Except for waiting on those last few top level CEO holders to pop their clogs, as they've held these sort of positions for longer than the push for equality has gone on.

tabascoboy wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:55 am Not sure if the Reform candidates in question were fake ID and non-existent, but it seems that they touted around for supporters willing to have their name used no matter where they lived. With no actual chance of winning the seat, no involvement in local campaigning it didn't matter whether the person would be able or willing to take their seat in the HoP and represent the constituency and people as they should. Kinda wishing that one of them had won now and the person and party having to all take the consequences, when the voters found out.

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:00 am

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:51 am

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Except the problem is women get paid less for doing the same jobs in pretty much every sector.

Do they? Last time I looked into it, it was actually pretty equal for most situations. Once other factors were taken into account (delayed career progression due to maternity leave, raising family etc), often working fewer hours for the same reason. Once all these were included, per hours per experience etc it was actually fairly close. Except for waiting on those last few top level CEO holders to pop their clogs, as they've held these sort of positions for longer than the push for equality has gone on.

Simian wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:53 am

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:00 am

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:51 am

Except the problem is women get paid less for doing the same jobs in pretty much every sector.

Do they? Last time I looked into it, it was actually pretty equal for most situations. Once other factors were taken into account (delayed career progression due to maternity leave, raising family etc), often working fewer hours for the same reason. Once all these were included, per hours per experience etc it was actually fairly close. Except for waiting on those last few top level CEO holders to pop their clogs, as they've held these sort of positions for longer than the push for equality has gone on.

The most recent (2023) ONS statistics show a male-biased pay gap in pay per hour worked for each of the nine biggest employment sectors.

sturginho wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:56 am

tabascoboy wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:55 am Not sure if the Reform candidates in question were fake ID and non-existent, but it seems that they touted around for supporters willing to have their name used no matter where they lived. With no actual chance of winning the seat, no involvement in local campaigning it didn't matter whether the person would be able or willing to take their seat in the HoP and represent the constituency and people as they should. Kinda wishing that one of them had won now and the person and party having to all take the consequences, when the voters found out.

It does seem that you now need more proof of identity to be allowed to vote than to stand in an election

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:51 am

Random1 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:38 am

epwc wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 8:37 pm

No still not getting it,

Men choose their jobs, they also choose whether to protect themselves properly at work. I can say from personal knowledge on building sites that it’s always a challenge to get blokes to wear PPE on site.

They have chosen risky career paths and then to exacerbate that risk.

So men choose riskier careers. I agree on this.

Do you not feel they should be paid more for taking more dangerous jobs?

Or, in other words; Women choose their jobs that, overall, are less risky. These choices therefore play a significant role in pay differences between the sexes.

Except the problem is women get paid less for doing the same jobs in pretty much every sector.

Biffer wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:04 pm I'm interested to know how you run a country without any bureaucrats.

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:02 pm So being bored and wondering if it'll be a bit of a giggle, I've started to watch the PopCon conference on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/live/X5CPSZZZ6h0

First proper speaker, representing popcon, has basically just said it's not the tories fault that they didn't manage deliver the values of lower tax, less regulation, controlled borders etc, but rather the systems/institutions that are setup in the country (over the past 25 years) that prevent this. Says that should they get in power again, they need to change the background before they can get around to bringing around proper change (why they didn't do this in the last 14 years, who knows...).

He's also saying that getting out of the EU was big, but we just handed over the power to beaurocrats in whitehall...

epwc wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:31 pm Dr David Starkey is a racist fuckwit

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 3:02 pm I got 10 minutes in or so, and yes, he's making the same complaints, just being more of an ass and a bore about it.

So the poor Tories couldn't do what they want because other people didn't let them. It's all someone else's fault.

In theory then, Labour shouldn't be able to do any better, and we're all buggered regardless.

Raggs wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:02 pm So being bored and wondering if it'll be a bit of a giggle, I've started to watch the PopCon conference on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/live/X5CPSZZZ6h0

First proper speaker, representing popcon, has basically just said it's not the tories fault that they didn't manage deliver the values of lower tax, less regulation, controlled borders etc, but rather the systems/institutions that are setup in the country (over the past 25 years) that prevent this. Says that should they get in power again, they need to change the background before they can get around to bringing around proper change (why they didn't do this in the last 14 years, who knows...).

He's also saying that getting out of the EU was big, but we just handed over the power to beaurocrats in whitehall...