British Politics

[SoulMonster]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

When done correctly I agree.  And by correctly I mean in a manner which is effective, not standing holding a piece of card with a spurious slogan that doesn't bear even the slightest level of face value scrutiny, as action illustrated in his post.  Its a joke and I don't believe it is being done with any regard for women in hand but rather an attempt to pander to a certain demographic who will go 'oh isn't Sadiq such a noble liberal fella, making such a stand' or 'I'm gonna vote for THAT guy, he cares'.  Its bollocks. 

That's part of being a politician, in addition to engage those that disagree with you, you also cater to your voting base by making sure you are on their side. This is just that, a short slogan to emphasize where you stand. It isn't meant to actually convince anyone that you are right It is pure tribalism. But again, politicians have to flag standpoints. It could have been anything, like "Black Lives Matter" or anything else that is en vogue at the moment.

Turns out this isn't about workplace discrimination after all, but a new episode in the public spat between the mayor of London and Trump, and the message is supposedly against the anti-abortion laws in the US. I don't get it. But anyway.

Edited June 4, 2019 by SoulMonster

[Len Cnut]

Quote

That's part of being a politician, in addition to engage those that disagree with you, you also cater to your voting base by making sure you are on their side. This is just that, a short slogan to emphasize where you stand. It isn't meant to actually convince anyone that you are right It is pure tribalism. But again, politicians have to flag standpoints. 

Pandering and making a stand are not synonymous, there are connotations to the term pandering that lend it somewhat to a less than honest position.

Quote

Turns out this isn't about workplace discrimination after all, but a new episode in the public spat between the mayor of London and Trump, and the message is supposedly against the anti-abortion laws in the US. I don't get it. But anyway.

Perhaps the notion that the making of abortion illegal by a patriarchal society is a way to control women, hold them down, make them the  opposite of strong? 

[DieselDaisy]

Sadiq Khan is a poster boy for London's ''wealthy lefties'': EU nutters; envrionmentalists; Vegan loonies blockading butcher shops; and anti-American activists. Whilst knife crime has rocketed under his stewardship, the entire city is brought to a standstill for the latest do-gooder cause. 

[Len Cnut]

13 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Sadiq Khan is a poster boy for London's ''wealthy lefties'': EU nutters; envrionmentalists; Vegan loonies blockading butcher shops; and anti-American activists. Whilst knife crime has rocketed under his stewardship, the entire city is brought to a standstill for the latest do-gooder cause. 

I ran into a fuckin' army of those twats on Oxford Circus, proper fuckin' annoying, its like trying to walk through quicksand.  Some bloke with a camera and this interviewer bird goes will you spare a minute for...fuck knows, whatever youtube channel or whatever they were working for.  Told em to fuck off. 

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Len Cnut said:

I ran into a fuckin' army of those twats on Oxford Circus, proper fuckin' annoying, its like trying to walk through quicksand.  Some bloke with a camera and this interviewer bird goes will you spare a minute for...fuck knows, whatever youtube channel or whatever they were working for.  Told em to fuck off. 

Everybody right now is protesting against something. Apparently there was an anti-Trump protest in Newcastle! Just what the heck is that going to achieve? I can envision the scenario,

(Donald Trump) ''Jeez, the people of Newcastle-upon-Tyne really hate me and make some good points on what a bad job of the presidency I am making. Maybe I should resign, or at least amend my ways''. 

[Len Cnut]

13 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Everybody right now is protesting against something. Apparently there was an anti-Trump protest in Newcastle! Just what the heck is that going to achieve? I can envision the scenario,

(Donald Trump) ''Jeez, the people of Newcastle-upon-Tyne really hate me and make some good points on what a bad job of the presidency I am making. Maybe I should resign, or at least amend my ways''. 

The problem with protest is that everyone makes the placards, goes out for the walk and toddles off home.  Out of ALL the people that attend how many of them are engaged in any further substantial political activism of some sort?  It can't just be limited to going out for a stroll on a sunny day, you end up devaluing the thing.  And there's only so far you can go with the obstructive aspect of it as well, it kind of turns the common man more against you than for you.

[action]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

There is a fairly widespread problem that qualified women are discriminated against in certain industries by men who prefer to work with other men, resulting in certain positions, in particular leading positions, mainly being held by men. This "glass ceiling" erected by men prevents "strong" women from realizing their potential. The slogan refers to this by stating that men who hold such qualified women back, are themselves "weak".

It has nothing to do with physical strength, but workplace qualifications and workplace discrimination.

That a politicians takes a stand against this is only commendable to me. It is not more pandering than any other politician taking a clear stand on a divisive issue. That he "insults" men who discriminate against women, is something I am entirely fine with.

There is nothing empty about casting the spotlight at discrimination and patriarchy. And making sure that women have equal opportunities is a noble liberal stand.

oh, so it's leading men this sign is aimed at.

I don't understand a couple of things though.

I don't have a leading position, I'm not responsible for giving women positions. neither are any of my friends. In my family, also not.

Where I work, and you just have to believe my word on this, I have never seen a case you describe. Quite on the contrary; my first boss was a woman (she did a shitty job at being a boss, but this isn't important to the debate)

just how many people is this sign aimed at? and why does this sign not specify that only a very small part of the public is adressed. Yet, here is the sign and it is aimed at the general public. It is aimed, indiscriminately, at all men who "fear" strong women. Not just discriminate women who aspire leading positions, but who "fear" them for whatever reason. There is no room for nuance, it is just a trollish signpost completely missing the mark. If the intent was to raise awareness among leading CEO positions not to discriminate women, this sign did a pretty lousy job making this clear.

Edited June 4, 2019 by action

[DieselDaisy]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

The problem with protest is that everyone makes the placards, goes out for the walk and toddles off home.  Out of ALL the people that attend how many of them are engaged in any further substantial political activism of some sort?  It can't just be limited to going out for a stroll on a sunny day, you end up devaluing the thing.  And there's only so far you can go with the obstructive aspect of it as well, it kind of turns the common man more against you than for you.

They all drive off in their 4x4s as there is a tea of humus and quinoa waiting for them - provided by Waitrose of course. I actually have a confession: I had halloumi the other day.  

[action]

27 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

 This is just that, a short slogan to emphasize where you stand..

a tactic plentifull used by the nazis

[DieselDaisy]

Wonder what they were discussing? The finale of Game of Thrones maybe,

I would need something stronger than bottled water to endure sitting through a meeting with Trump - that's sure. 

Larry the Cat under Trump's ''Beast'',

Edited June 4, 2019 by DieselDaisy

[Len Cnut]

Who the fuckin' hells Larry the cat?!

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

Who the fuckin' hells Larry the cat?!

10 Downing Street's only permanent resident. 

[action]

48 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

 

So what's your problem with the statement, "Only weak men fear strong women"?

at least it didn't say "all men fear strong women". apparently, only weak men do. which is a fallacy in and of it's own. I'm sure there are strong men who fear strong women too. Why would they not? What makes it about strong men, that they would never fear strong women?

Unless the message was that fearing strong women "makes" you weak, which is even more patronizing.

It's these kind of bold statements, propaganda statements, that are factually incorrect but provoke a feeling anyway. With the mindless mass, that is open to this kind of indoctrination, these kind of slogans find fertile ground. Slogans like these are not meant to convince the intelligent, but rather to indoctrinate the stupid. 

The more I think about it, the more fascist I find it all

Edited June 4, 2019 by action

[Len Cnut]

12 minutes ago, action said:

at least it didn't say "all men fear strong women". apparently, only weak men do. which is a fallacy in and of it's own. I'm sure there are strong men who fear strong women too. Why would then not? What makes it about strong men, that they would never fear strong women?

Unless the message was that fearing strong women "makes" you weak, which is even more patronizing.

It's these kind of bold statements, propaganda statements, that are factually incorrect but provoke a feeling anyway. With the mindless mass, that is open to this kind of indoctrination, these kind of slogans find fertile ground. Slogans like these are not meant to convince the intelligent, but rather to indoctrinate the stupid. 

The more I think about it, the more fascist I find it all

What bothers me about it is the inhumanity of it, the broad strokes...and they're deliberately so to, as you say, provoke a reaction.  You see a lot of it in 'political' rock bands.  Now one of my favourite bands ever (The Clash) are or rather were a political rock band and I am onside with a lot of the sentiment in their songs but they suffered from a similar thing, rabble rousing sloganeering, these things necessarily lend themselves to extremism because they make things black and white, they are anti-intellectual and overly simplistic.

17 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

10 Downing Street's only permanent resident. 

He better watch himself or he'll end up Larry the Roadkill.

[action]

10 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

What bothers me about it is the inhumanity of it, the broad strokes...and they're deliberately so to, as you say, provoke a reaction.  You see a lot of it in 'political' rock bands.  Now one of my favourite bands ever (The Clash) are or rather were a political rock band and I am onside with a lot of the sentiment in their songs but they suffered from a similar thing, rabble rousing sloganeering, these things necessarily lend themselves to extremism because they make things black and white, they are anti-intellectual and overly simplistic.

 

it really isn't meant to be analised by intellectuals because it would take less time then a snowball melting on venus, to show it's inaccuracies.

people like the mayor of london live off empty statements and rely on emotions provoked with the mass, to survive. they use means like twitter and instagram, aimed at the mass, to spread their nonsense. You won't see these kind of people step into a debate with an intellectual, because even they realise their opinion doesn't hold logical and factual ground.

faced with immense opposition by people who took notice and try to show him his inaccuracies, they play the victim card and all they say is "see, these are all weak men taking offence" and that's that.

if these are the kind of people that have to fight for "social justice", then I pity those who really need it

Edited June 4, 2019 by action

[DieselDaisy]

Larry the Cat is considered the intellectual of Downing Street I believe.

[Len Cnut]

Nothing but pussies in No 10 since Blair.  Major even, the big four eyed slag.  Mind you he was bangin' Edwina on the sly, weren't he, the dodgy fucker

Edited June 4, 2019 by Len Cnut

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, action said:

oh, so it's leading men this sign is aimed at.

I don't understand a couple of things though.

I don't have a leading position, I'm not responsible for giving women positions. neither are any of my friends. In my family, also not.

Where I work, and you just have to believe my word on this, I have never seen a case you describe. Quite on the contrary; my first boss was a woman (she did a shitty job at being a boss, but this isn't important to the debate)

just how many people is this sign aimed at? and why does this sign not specify that only a very small part of the public is adressed. Yet, here is the sign and it is aimed at the general public. It is aimed, indiscriminately, at all men who "fear" strong women. Not just discriminate women who aspire leading positions, but who "fear" them for whatever reason. There is no room for nuance, it is just a trollish signpost completely missing the mark. If the intent was to raise awareness among leading CEO positions not to discriminate women, this sign did a pretty lousy job making this clear.

I don't think you can expect such a statement to be relevant to 100 % of the audience. That's like saying that "black lives matter" as a statement doesn't hold value because the majority of police officers aren't racist, etc.

And great that you haven't seen any discrimination against women in the workplace, but it is a fairly well-documented thing.

1 hour ago, action said:

a tactic plentifull used by the nazis

Heh. And by everyone else, really.

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Len Cnut said:

Nothing but pussies in No 10 since Blair.

You are not a Blairite are you? That would be the Oasis connection? ''Cool Britannia''. ''Things will only get better''. 

I see Change UK, hitherto The Independence Group, have collapsed like (as my mother would say) ''a bag of tay-tees''. They should have really formed a ''remain alliance'' with the Liberal Democrats, and they shouldn't have called themselves Change considering that is the very reverse of what they stand for (i.e., they want to remain in the EU, i.e., the status quo). Pillocks.

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, action said:

at least it didn't say "all men fear strong women". apparently, only weak men do. which is a fallacy in and of it's own. I'm sure there are strong men who fear strong women too. Why would they not? What makes it about strong men, that they would never fear strong women?

Unless the message was that fearing strong women "makes" you weak, which is even more patronizing.

It's these kind of bold statements, propaganda statements, that are factually incorrect but provoke a feeling anyway. With the mindless mass, that is open to this kind of indoctrination, these kind of slogans find fertile ground. Slogans like these are not meant to convince the intelligent, but rather to indoctrinate the stupid. 

The more I think about it, the more fascist I find it all

I think the point is that fearing strong women makes you weak. 

Fascist? 

[DieselDaisy]

Soul is a strong woman. So naturally he feels very passionate about this subject. 

[Len Cnut]

26 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I think the point is that fearing strong women makes you weak.

Whats wrong with being weak?  The whole thing plays on the same gender roles that feminism fights so hard to counteract, the idea that, in a patriarchial society, there is currency in being a strong man and if you're not one its something to be looked down upon.  Why not fear a strong woman?  Or a strong man?  I mean they're strong right?  The whole thing works (or tries to) on the psychology-related premise that prejudice is based on a deep-rooted fear or phobia, which is why you have terms like homophobia to denote prejudice against homosexuals or Islamaphobia to denote prejudice against the religion of Islam, thats what its trying to get at, its just not that clever or powerful a statement because it doesn't bear scrutiny very well.

27 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You are not a Blairite are you? That would be the Oasis connection? ''Cool Britannia''. ''Things will only get better''.

I called him a pussy, that hardly denotes a Blairite   I suppose I did say since, which is a little open to interpretation, I meant since he got elected in.

Edited June 4, 2019 by Len Cnut

[SoulMonster]

7 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Whats wrong with being weak? 

With the assumption that "strong" means you are well-qualified, skilled, and confident, "weak" would mean the opposite. 

[action]

35 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't think you can expect such a statement to be relevant to 100 % of the audience. That's like saying that "black lives matter" as a statement doesn't hold value because the majority of police officers aren't racist, etc.

And great that you haven't seen any discrimination against women in the workplace, but it is a fairly well-documented thing.

Heh. And by everyone else, really.

it's even more ironic that the messenger is in a leading position himself - the mayor of london no less. How many women didn't get this position, because of him?

even more now that he has posted that sign, and apparently addressing male people in leading positions, the right thing for him to do now is step down and give his position to a women, and if that's not possible declaring he steps down to leave room for a woman. What a powerfull message that would be! More powerfull than a thousand shitty signposts with idiotic statements

[action]

13 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

With the assumption that "strong" means you are well-qualified, skilled, and confident, "weak" would mean the opposite. 

I assume that men in leading positions are well - qualified, skilled and confident, ergo, strong? But fearing strong women makes them weak?

I wonder how this process works

 

Edited June 4, 2019 by action