I think it's a composite of factors that also includes other variables
DO you accept that one of them is sexism ?
What I am angry about is the continuous rhetoric that attacks my gender as if being male means I am in some way to blame for the problem
Why is an attack on what our gender do in general an attack on you personally?
Men tend to commit most crimes ...am I really crticising you by that statement of fact ?
, we see the issue as completely binary, as if all men have enjoyed some kind of benefit at the expense of all women and that's just not true. Not now and not ever.
You really think that its not easier for man to achieve than a woman in general- you look at all areas of life, business, politics, art and you think yes what I see is a non patriarchal meritocracy where women can benefit as well as men...there is literally no evidence base to support that claim and the counter point i true, you will be telling me next that privately educated kids dont have an advantage in life next 🙄
I get your point but the facts just dont support your view.
How about schools - primary schools have 1 in 10 teachers are male Do you think its only 10% of senior roles occupied by men? Care to guess at the figure? Examples can be found in ALL fields of this.
I was considering deconstructing that but saying it was bollocks seemed to make more sense.I've never been the kind of man that enjoyed some kind of benefit or priviledge as a result of being male. Far from it and quite the reverse in some instances
A few odd exemplars that are atypical in no way redress the overwhelming evidence. if you want to play the oppressed white middle class man card then i shall merely shake my head at your inability to understand data.
The greatest prejudice we are ALL guilty of is that we demonstrate towards others on account of their personality.
You cannot prejudge someone personality you actually have to know them to make the judgment and you have confused liking and disliking fok based on the content of their character with disliking them due to skin colour or race or gender. no one is going to promote the lazy useless person with no social skills. That not discrimination as it is applied to ALL.However when we disproportionately promote folk who have a penis we do have to look at the reason may . Its unlikely due to them being more talented. When we pay them more its unlikely its down to them being "tougher" and "better" negotiators - which in itself is a sexist argument.
How come all lefties wear their revolutionary credentials like a badge of honour, then the first sniff of power and they develop an ultra authoritarian streak and turn into little tinpot dictators?
It must be utterly elating as a socialist to feel that maybe, just maybe things are going to start to change..
That perhaps we can start to wrestle some power and wealth back from the people with the old money..
That we might, for the first time in history be witnessing a new dawn in the age old battle to close the gap between rich and poor..
And then utterly crushing as you realise that actually even your closest allies are all on the other team, that you are in a nest of vipers and that the glimmer of hope that you showed the people can always be instantly extinguished by the snide chuckling of the elite..
The absolute futility of it all suddenly brought rushing home as you understand completely that the wealthy are in total control and they are not about sharing
Probably once you've gone that far your conscience couldn't let you go down without a fight, a last ditch attempt to regain some control..
And the wealthy know that this will happen, and that you'll be mocked and ridiculed, and that people will look back on socialist politics for the next couple of decades and laugh at the dewey eyed sentimentality dismissing socialism as idealistic dreams and nonsense
And that's why they let an idealist rise almost to power occasionally.. they let it happen so that they can maintain control
EAT THE RICH
Vote Corbyn
What it really meant was 'if I get in power, then you'll all immediately be placed under surveillance' and any hint of dissent, and we'll pack you off to the gulag.
Definitely true and thanks for the translation
A leader expecting the MPs to follow him and respect the democratic wishes of the party membership that they serve. You dont get more Stalinist than that and it certainly separates him from ever other leader ever in the history of politics 🙄How come all lefties wear their revolutionary credentials like a badge of honour, then the first sniff of power and they develop an ultra authoritarian streak and turn into little tinpot dictators?
You are getting more and more like Richard Littlejohn as this thread develops.
[quote=mefty ]The first time I saw the 40,000 number was yesterday afternoon and that was in the far right magazine, the New Statesman.
WHat article i never saw it - link? Source?
Either way they cannot search and process 40,000 new members in a day. Vetting 100 for one person in one day would be a tall order eve if we assume it took 5 mins per person which is very generous. The figure is clearly fabricated.
So the soft left /"intellectual"/ Middle class yoghurt weavers are against Corbyn....who knew eh who knew
Because I believe that s/he believes what they see, they just don't have the ability to understand what they're seeing or convey it without getting confused.
Degree educated and apst grad from Oxford
Pretty sure he can process information if he wanted to do it and he is doing to get the biggest rise out of folk who keep feeding him - me included.
IMHO - did you see the allardyce post yesterday for example? - its just a piss take/troll to get a reaction from the "usual" suspects. No one can struggle this much with basic facts without actually putting effort into it.
No way can he think he is only ever been wrong 4 or 5 times, he can manage that in one sentence.
How come all [s]lefties[/s] One Nation Tories wear their [s]revolutionary[/s] establishment credentials like a badge of honour, then the first sniff of power and they develop an ultra authoritarian streak and turn into little tinpot dictators?
I always just assume that every Tory will behave like a dictator, based on the 'Born to Rule' gene they all seem to be born with 😉
Degree educated and apst grad from OxfordPretty sure he can process information if he wanted to do it and he is doing to get the biggest rise out of folk who keep feeding him - me included.
IMHO - did you see the allardyce post yesterday for example? - its just a piss take/troll to get a reaction from the "usual" suspects. No one can struggle this much with basic facts without actually putting effort into it.
😀
Obviously, this is why there's no reply when the going gets tough and has to back stuff up (I'll keep calling it out).
I'm still waiting for the police's guarantee for everyone else's safety where they cannot guarantee Angla Eagle's, a clear and bold claim by jamba that they can. Obvs.
[s]EAT THE RICH[/s] ENSURE THE TORIES STAY IN POWER FOR EVER!
Vote Corbyn
FTFY 😉
I've said it before..
I'd rather the tories got in again and shafted us, if the alternative you're proposing is a tory labour party that drags us back to the centre and dashes any hope of reform
keep the labour party left wing
Have we done "Behave, or I'll call your dad!" yet?
@ConorMcGinn on the twit.
I've said it before..I'd rather the tories got in again and shafted us, if the alternative you're proposing is a tory labour party that drags us back to the centre and dashes any hope of reform
keep the labour party left wing
And this is where it's at. Champagne socialism has its place, but needs the socialism element to differentiate from out and out tory labour that we currently have.
For me it's about people and not personal wealth.
I just had a nightmare vision of the future, that seems all too plausable
1) Corbyn is re-elected as leader. Seems inevitable now really, due to the lefty/trot/tory trojan horse insurgency
2) Theresa May, still gob-smacked at her luck, immediately calls a snap election
3) Labour goes down to the heaviest defeat in its history, losing a mass of former heartlands to UKIP
4) The Glorious Leader doesn't even contemplate resigning, as its just the electorate being too stupid to see that he knows whats best for them.
5) The labour party implodes even more so than it has done already
^0 The Tories, cackling with delight, set about a 20 year programme of turbo charged capitalism, knowing they will now be completely uncchallenged
I'd rather the tories got in again and shafted us, if the alternative you're proposing is a tory labour party that drags us back to the centre and dashes any hope of reform
then you're absolutely insane! Pure and simple! I suspect that when what you're advocating comes to pass, and the Tories are totally unopposed, as they are now, for ever, you'll probably be less keen
Whats terrifying is that people with attitudes like yours are about to doom us all to this dystopian outcome, and you either can't see it, or your precious principles mean more
it's not terrifying though binners..
change gonna come, but not if you cave in and return to the established routine every time it starts to look a bit scary
you're just a coward
Moderation? It's mediocrity, fear, and confusion in disguise. It's the devil's dilemma. It's neither doing nor not doing. It's the wobbling compromise that makes no one happy. Moderation is for the bland, the apologetic, for the fence-sitters of the world afraid to take a stand. It's for those afraid to laugh or cry, for those afraid to live or die. Moderation...is lukewarm tea, the devil's own brew.
At least the tories are good at making money, your version of labour is nothing more than a weak gesture.. An appeasement to the bitter middle ground
I must indeed be a coward. Because you lot actually terrify me!
you lot actually terrify me
😆 very emotive binners
I never had you pegged as a Waitrose socialist... look out mate, they'll be coming for your tapenade before you know it
Whats terrifying is that people with attitudes like yours are about to doom us all to this dystopian outcome, and you either can't see it, or your precious principles mean more
WTF is wrong with having inviolable principles?
You would rather we all lied to get power? this is the more noble and better option?
The party is in a mess and I am not denying it but asking folk to ignore their principles - if you must ask then ask the PLP as they are the ****ing minority here- is insane
Suppress the scream!!
@geetee I am with you on this. I have always tried to have a healthy mix of professional women in my teams. I know when hiring for grad schemes all terms are equal however you do notice 5/10 years on women tend to have lower pay. We always paid for the role. You cannot escape the fact that its women who tend to take career breaks for families and/or take lower level jobs than they might otherwise do in order to juggle childcare. I have had one very talented woman give up work entirely at 32, that's completely her choice of choice but the firm had invested a lot in her in terms of training and opportunity. Whatever you write in law this will always be in the back of people's minds, this applies to both men and women managers. I have also seen the other side of the coin with some quite hopeless women threaten to sue for "sex discrimination" when they have been fired for being rubbish, and get paid off handsomely.
Sky News is availble online, easy to watch anywhere. I use it for example to watch press conferences which are often shown in full, eg Obama Brexit, May in Germany and France .. that way I can make up my own mind and not rely on editors cut and interpretation. They showed quite a few facebook pages etc with "we'll lend you £25" in order to vote plus figure on £7000 dontaed for such purposes by a pro-Corbyn group. They also had a quick question / answer with Jezza on it with him confirming that was against the rules. I have no doubt we'll hear more about this as the days go on.
There is absolutely nothing kinder or gentler about Corbyn's leadership nor a significant number of his Momentum followers.
Statement released by a Labour MP today
A Labour MP has accused leader Jeremy Corbyn of trying to bully him, after apparently considering using his family against him.In a statement, Conor McGinn says the episode began in May, when he gave an interview to The House magazine.
He concludes: "When I watched Jeremy's interview on Newsnight last night, I am afraid I could no longer tolerate the hypocrisy of him talking about a kinder, gentler politics when I knew for a fact that he had proposed using my family against me in an attempt to bully me in to submission because he didn't like something I said.
[url= http://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-corbyn-tried-to-bully-me-10509144 ]linky[/url]
[quote=CaptainFlashheart ]Have we done "Behave, or I'll call your dad!" yet?
@ConorMcGinn on the twit.
At least second or third hand hearsay[ though i had originally typed heresy!] at best, unsourced and from someone who dislike Corbyn
Its pretty meaningless IMHO and most likely just a smear.
No evidence to support it is there
In general I would imagine party whips are amoral shits who would do anything and do bully the MPs using anything at all as leverage to get their wishes- I doubt you will find any great difference in MO from any party- Got a view yourself flashy or just going to throw stones at the nasty lefties ?
@geetee I am with you on this. I have always tried to have a healthy mix of professional women in my teams. I know when hiring for grad schemes all terms are equal however you do notice 5/10 years on women tend to have lower pay. We always paid for the role. You cannot escape the fact that its women who tend to take career breaks for families and/or take lower level jobs than they might otherwise do in order to juggle childcare. I have had one very talented woman give up work entirely at 32, that's completely her choice of choice but the firm had invested a lot in her in terms of training and opportunity. Whatever you write in law this will always be in the back of people's minds, this applies to both men and women managers. I have also seen the other side of the coin with some quite hopeless women threaten to sue for "sex discrimination" when they have been fired for being rubbish, and get paid off handsomely.
If the fellas are increasing the pay for the role, why not increase the pay of their female colleagues in line with this? It might prevent talented females from leaving. What was the reason for the talented 32 yr old leaving? If it was to increase her pay then that was the employers fault for not keeping up, not hers. There might be a million unrelated reasons, which,of course, you're not going to include.
WTF is wrong with having inviolable principles?
nothing
You would rather we all lied to get power? this is the more noble and better option?
The party is in a mess and I am not denying it but asking folk to ignore their principles
Ever heard the word 'compromise'. It tends to be a major factor in successful politics. Without it, the labour party becomes a powerless bunch of protestors shouting into a void. For ever
if you must ask then ask the PLP as they are the **** minority here- is insane
Every MP has been democratically elected by their constituents. This has been pointed out over and over and over again. You lot seem to think they've been appointed by some imaginary 'Blairite' comitee
CFH - no, you beat me to it, just posted on this above. Corbyn is a bully (Conor McGinn's word amd mine too)
How does Corbyn have inviolable principals when he speaks and blogs for 30 years against the EU then campaigns for Remain ? To be more Machiavellian he seems to have deliberately sabotaged the campaign, thats the only "principled" argument possible here.
How does Corbyn have inviolable principals when he speaks for 30 years against the EU then campaigns for Remain ?
Because you can be critical of something without wanting to destroy the country's future by throwing that thing away.
Because you can be critical of something without wanting to destroy the country's future by throwing that thing away.
Different views of the future are availabke. Corbyn believes the future is brighter outside the EU not least as a Labour government would be able to set policy as it sees fit and because he believes in democracy
WHat article i never saw it - link? Source?
It wasn't an article, it is on George Eaton's twitter feed, [url= https://twitter.com/georgeeaton ]link[/url]
He was pretty clear in his remain campaign that it was due to what the tories would do to workers rights/environment/etc given a free hand.
I think that's what frustrated many - in that he didn't give other people's remain arguments - just the ones he actually believed.
[quote=mefty ]
WHat article i never saw it - link? Source?
It wasn't an article, it is on George Eaton's twitter feed, link
Final registered supporter figure will be close to 140,000, Labour source says.
I read that as [i]an expectation[/i] that it'll be around 140,000 once invalid registrations are excluded, not that they already have been.That's 43,541 drop due to invalid applications, duplicates etc.
You really think that its not easier for man to achieve than a woman in general- you look at all areas of life, business, politics, art and you think yes what I see is a non patriarchal meritocracy where women can benefit as well as men
Yes I do and the evidence that this is the case is growing though it's not the case everywhere and some counties even in the developed world lag behind.
As for not being able to discriminate against personality, we'll have to agree to disagree but as far as I can see, that's a great example of the far left's greatest failing; you only see prejudice and injustice where it suits you.
Different views of the future are availabke.
They certainly are, still waiting to find out what we're going to do with the £350 million a week, if not given it to the NHS.
Every MP has been democratically elected by their constituents
Before that point they are democratically elected by the Labour party to represent their members. Are You saying now the electorate voted for a labour party candidate they can just ignore the labour party membership and what the party represents?
I read that as an expectation that it'll be around 140,000 once invalid registrations are excluded, not that they already have been.
I would agree, I imagine Sky would have said this as well and Jamby got the tense wrong. I was merely pointing out that Sky weren't the first out with the number so it is hardly a Murdoch plot - to be honest he is too busy dealing with issues at Fox News. It is also unlikely because Sky is required to be impartial and this is regulated by Ofcom. It is sad to say their news gathering operation is miles ahead of the BBC these days, they were so far ahead of the BBC on the Turkey Coup it was embarassing.
I will never forget the second person who managed me sitting me in a room and saying to be quite bluntly 'I think professionally you're really good but I personally just cannot stand you'.
so how did that meeting end Geetee? 😕
Yes I do and the evidence that this is the case is growing though it's not the case everywhere and some counties even in the developed world lag behind.
😯
No one can look at the evidence and NOT see a disproportionate number of males in all areas. that it is slowly being rolled back does not mean it is not still there. Its ludicrous to claim otherwise
As for not being able to discriminate against personality, we'll have to agree to disagree
I said its ok to pick folk for roles based on their capabilities/ "personalities" .What are we disagreeing on exactly ?
Oh the irony oh the irony 😆but as far as I can see, that's a great example of the far left's greatest failing; you only see prejudice and injustice where it suits you.
1.I dont personally see injustice as a left or a right issue. You either care about equality and equal treatment and opportunity or you dont.
2.You need to make a compelling case to show me that men are discriminated against.women are not. I dont care not because i am left wing but because its NOT TRUE. Its not a party political issue and even i dont think all RW are evil racist sexist...the majority but not all 😉 Flashy and THM are both very vocal in this area for example.
You can froth like a right wing loon trying to use barbs if you like but its just silly politics /trolling rather than actually engaging in the topic under discussion:roll:
Are You saying now the electorate voted for a labour party candidate they can just ignore the labour party membership and what the party represents?
But they are, for instance support for Trident is Labour party policy, it is Corbyn who is ignoring it. Until Labour Party policy is changed at the conference, you can't really say the MPs are ignoring the official Labour position.
so how did that meeting end Geetee?
With me feeling like I didn't fit in, like my face didn't fit and that it was in some way my fault for being the wrong sort of man.
To summarise what I think the problem with Corbyn's brand of politics is, you only have to look at what happened in the Brexit vote to see the effect of it. The left has alienated a whole swathe of voters, largely men, frequently working class and to a large extent also the aspirational middle class. They all voted for Blair hence he won a landslide victory in 1997 and a solid one four years later. Somewhere beyond 2002, about the time we invaded Iraq, the party lost its way and seemed to abandon the idea that in order to get elected you have to appeal to everyone.
All the arguments on this thread levelled against what I'm saying are all characterised by 'your white, middle class, straight (well maybe) and male; you are the problem. You have no right to be agrieved at anything and we are coming for you'.
Well forgive me if I don't feel inclined to vote for you.
Perfectly summed up.
A couple of us are off to a Momentum meeting in a couple of weeks as theres one nearby. I'm going out of genuine interest. I want to see if the people at a meeting are any less extreme than the social media/interweb caricatures Because quite frankly, the opinions I've heard voiced generally (ie: some of the stuff on this thread) are absolutely barking! And have about as much chance of winning a general election, as I have of winning the Tour.
t it was in some way my fault for being the wrong sort of man.
they disliked you it was not about you being the wrong sort of man but the wrong sort of person - not meant to have a dig just explaining their view. I have not met you /have no opinion on this matter
All the arguments on this thread levelled against what I'm saying are all characterised by 'your white, middle class, straight (well maybe) and male; you are the problem. You have no right to be agrieved at anything and we are coming for you'.
That is a risible straw man- truly terrible comprehension
If its not the fault of men that women are discriminated against then it must be because women really are just crapper at men in every area of working life and the pay reflect the true state of affairs re talent.
I would suggest that is false
You can deal with this as if you are the victim of [ left wing led] race and gender hate crime if you really want but it is very very silly
Owen Smith on bullying.
There is an undercurrent in the Labour Party today which is very unpleasant we have seen in particluar with Jewish members and Jewish MPs
Jeremy says he doesn't condone it but it didn't exist in this way before his leadership, there is now a culture of bullying under his watch
He does not speak about Jews the way you speak about Muslims though does he.
geetee1972 - MemberAll the arguments on this thread levelled against what I'm saying are all characterised by 'your white, middle class, straight (well maybe) and male; you are the problem. You have no right to be agrieved at anything and we are coming for you'.
Your imaginary thread sounds more interesting than this one tbh
Surely Mark Clark would contest that there are degrees of bullying and that one man's bullying is another man's legitimate level of keeping order.
Which one Binners?
Have a colleague involved locally, been meaning to get down and see what the temperature's like.
I like JC, but not some of the baggage he carries.
I want to see if the people he is inspiring are grown up enough to look to the future, not the past.
My own experience is that the people who have joined or are supporting JC, especially those younger than us, have nothing in common with Militant or the old school hard left.
I'd imagine most of them think Trotsky was a racehorse.
I would like us to progress as a democratic socialist party, rather than a social democratic one.
But, as I said pages ago, I'm willing to compromise on how we do that.
I don't and have never seen JC as any kind of long term solution.
If its not the fault of men that women are discriminated against then it must be because women really are just crapper at men in every area of working life
My argument is that the idea of 'fault' is the wrong way to approach this subject in the first place.
That the phenomenon is real is inaliable but it's not been engineered that way by a group of people, homegenous or otherwise, anymore than say climate change has been.
So yes, we should work to fix it but if you want to hold people to account you have to assume we're all collectively responsible.
they disliked you it was not about you being the wrong sort of man but the wrong sort of person - not meant to have a dig just explaining their view. I have not met you /have no opinion on this matter
First off I understand you're not having a dig and I truly respect your arguments and a big part of me wants to be your ally.
But, how is deciding that you don't like someone because they don't conform to your idea of what a 'bloke' should be any different to deciding that you don't like someone because they're, for instance, gay?
Throughout my career I have eschewed going out drinking with the boys (and the girls) at a time when first lad, then ladette culture was dominant. I've never liked football, cricket, rugby or, dare I say it, golf - heck I was even told once that my career in management wasn't going to last long if I didn't get into playing golf (and guess what, it didn't).
I've always worn my heart on my sleeve, been regarded as sensitive, expressive and, perhaps, prone to emotion (very feminie like). I've challenged the status quo, the corporate agena and always thought for myself.
This is what I mean by being 'the wrong sort of man'. How is that any different to being judged as not fitting in because any other, perhaps more immediately discernable characteristic. It just comes down to triage.
Jeremy says he doesn't condone it but it didn't exist in this way before his leadership, there is now a culture of bullying under his watch
"Warsi called on Theresa May and other leading politicians to stamp such tactics out of future campaigning. “This concept of the enemy within and fifth columnists, which was raised by people like Ukip, has now started to creep into mainstream politics. And that is why – however much I wanted London to be governed by a Tory mayor – I didn’t think the means justified the ends,” she said, referring to Zac Goldsmith’s controversial campaign in which he accused the eventual winner, Labour’s Sadiq Khan, of sharing platforms with extremists."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/22/politicians-blame-respectable-racism-lady-warsi
