The Commons Bar Mk XIII - MHoC Chat Thread

Announcements Posted on
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Boris' speech seemed somewhat poor to me
    Boris as a whole is poor, what did you expect. Maybe if he ever stepped foot in his constituency he might have half an idea of what to do as an MP. Actually gutted Randall stood down, might have been a Tory but he was a brilliant local MP (and pretty much said sorry on twitter when he found out Boris was running in his old seat)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Had planned to get stuff done tonight but instead I'm just listening to the new Creeper track on repeat
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Guys halp. I'm doing a seminar reading and it's going on about how some guy from the 50s is horribly sexist and his opinions worthless because he wrote about "man's" (as in mankind's) role in changing the Earth. This is a Geography module ffs. I can't deal
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The new proposed boundaries throw up some really interesting results in West Yorkshire..

    The new Spen constituency (the western half of Batley and Spen) would have seen the Lab majority reduced to ~2000 and Ukip get a whopping 26% of the vote. A 3% swing in 2020 and it goes blue.

    The Lab majority in Halifax falls to 300 votes. Realistically, that's gone.

    Most interestingly is that Wakefield with Mary Creigh has the new boundaries pulling down her majority to ~1100. Less than 1.5% swing needed to take it.

    The new seats that include Pudsey and Morley go red though.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well, at least if you leave the EU, you leave it properly.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Asked one of my work colleagues (former head of the feminist society) about the gender pay gap and how when factoring in part time working and pay per hour there is no gap, her response was that I didn't understand because I'd never experienced it and "I'm so angry right now"

    Sums it up Saoirse

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Asked one of my work colleagues (former head of the feminist society) about the gender pay gap and how when factoring in part time working and pay per hour there is no gap, her response was that I didn't understand because I'd never experienced it and "I'm so angry right now"

    Sums it up Saoirse

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think with the apparent pay gap, most feminists are really making the wrong argument. The issue isn't sexist employers paying women less, as you say that pretty much doesn't happen. But I believe there is a point to be made in that as a society we tend to place less economic value on stereotypically female work - the likes of teachers, nurses and secretaries being paid less than low-level managers, IT workers or most office jobs, despite requiring similar talent, experience and qualifications. I'd say this is largely caused by the relative lack of market forces on public sector salaries, women's lower tendency to negotiate and historically much lower membership rate in trade unions, but it does pay a part in women, on average, earning less. You could even bring up how as a capitalist economy we fail to reward mothers for raising children, despite the huge economic benefits of them doing so as well as possible, and that this is symptomatic of an economic system built to reward male labour whilst leaving women as economically subserviant. But instead of any feasible critique of the structure or indeed any critical thought at all, you get idiots shouting "misogyny!" at everything, discrediting others and just making themselves look stupid and frankly rather bigoted.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Junior doctor contracts imposed in Obstetrics and Gynaecology as of today.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Guys halp. I'm doing a seminar reading and it's going on about how some guy from the 50s is horribly sexist and his opinions worthless because he wrote about "man's" (as in mankind's) role in changing the Earth. This is a Geography module ffs. I can't deal
    You have two options to not lose marks in an essay on the subject:

    1) Rebuttal based on mumbo-jumbo about 'post-modern dialecticism' (no that doesn't mean anything afaik) or something similar
    2) Rebuttal based on witty comment about how the author has evidently never learned any linguistics
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    I think with the apparent pay gap, most feminists are really making the wrong argument. The issue isn't sexist employers paying women less, as you say that pretty much doesn't happen. But I believe there is a point to be made in that as a society we tend to place less economic value on stereotypically female work - the likes of teachers, nurses and secretaries being paid less than low-level managers, IT workers or most office jobs, despite requiring similar talent, experience and qualifications. I'd say this is largely caused by the relative lack of market forces on public sector salaries, women's lower tendency to negotiate and historically much lower membership rate in trade unions, but it does pay a part in women, on average, earning less. You could even bring up how as a capitalist economy we fail to reward mothers for raising children, despite the huge economic benefits of them doing so as well as possible, and that this is symptomatic of an economic system built to reward male labour whilst leaving women as economically subserviant. But instead of any feasible critique of the structure or indeed any critical thought at all, you get idiots shouting "misogyny!" at everything, discrediting others and just making themselves look stupid and frankly rather bigoted.
    But that's not a gender issue at all, we live in an economy dominated by market forces, which naturally punish altruism and reward selfishness. As strong proponents of public sectors we (in a backhanded way) promote women pay. You underestimate as well that even pregnancy aside (again, burdening employers with maternity pay, instead of state, I don't agree with) women are more likely to work part time and rank work as less important to their overall happiness than for men. Quite simply, pay matters more to men, who as a rule go out and work longer for it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Asked one of my work colleagues (former head of the feminist society) about the gender pay gap and how when factoring in part time working and pay per hour there is no gap, her response was that I didn't understand because I'd never experienced it and "I'm so angry right now"

    Sums it up Saoirse

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Welcome to the world of feminism, where a man being paid for overtime is sexist and that man is a rapist for ever looking anywhere near a woman. Where if you look at their body you're undressing them with your eyes, but if you don't you're body shaming them by refusing to look. And where they don't need no man, but need a leg up from the men to get anywhere in life.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Welcome to the world of feminism, where a man being paid for overtime is sexist and that man is a rapist for ever looking anywhere near a woman. Where if you look at their body you're undressing them with your eyes, but if you don't you're body shaming them by refusing to look. And where they don't need no man, but need a leg up from the men to get anywhere in life.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You're very miserable aren't you?*
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So Hammond is abandoning the surplus target set by Osborne and introducing a £3bn house building project.

    Proposals which if introduced by labour would have been described as 'looney lefty' and 'reckless' but when done by the conservatives they are wonderfully one nation.


    Nonetheless both are positives and the economic debate certainly has shifted to the left. Gone is the incredibly economically liberal approach of Camepron and Osborne. If May wasn't so darn authoritarian I might take to her.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    So Hammond is abandoning the surplus target set by Osborne
    You're kinda 11 weeks behind on that one, was announced almost immediately after Hammond started. Cameron and Osborne are being erased from history, not that it's hard particularly with George. Chancellors are rarely remembered if they don't go on to do something significant as PM, and Cameron was likely to be remembered as the PM who called a referendum and backed the wrong horse anyway, as much as he wanted to be remembered as the reformist.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    But that's not a gender issue at all, we live in an economy dominated by market forces, which naturally punish altruism and reward selfishness. As strong proponents of public sectors we (in a backhanded way) promote women pay. You underestimate as well that even pregnancy aside (again, burdening employers with maternity pay, instead of state, I don't agree with) women are more likely to work part time and rank work as less important to their overall happiness than for men. Quite simply, pay matters more to men, who as a rule go out and work longer for it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    There's an element of instinctual human nature in there as well as social conditioning reinforcing it though. Men have a lot of pressure on them to be the provider (and many women will divorce a failure). I for example could never be the homemaker.

    The bigger concern for women (as with politics evidencing quite well) is not that women can't make it to the top but rather that because of how masculine the workplace is, the women that make it to the top are often not especially feminine in many of their traits and i imagine are seen as odd by many.

    In general though i'd say the above is a wider problem within feminism. Instead of pushing women to go further as themselves, for many women it's made them substantially less feminine.

    (Original post by Bornblue)
    So Hammond is abandoning the surplus target set by Osborne and introducing a £3bn house building project.

    Proposals which if introduced by labour would have been described as 'looney lefty' and 'reckless' but when done by the conservatives they are wonderfully one nation.

    Nonetheless both are positives and the economic debate certainly has shifted to the left. Gone is the incredibly economically liberal approach of Camepron and Osborne. If May wasn't so darn authoritarian I might take to her.
    Not a fan of abandoning the target, i still believe that the state is too fat and greedy.

    With such a small spend it will be quite modest but it's good to see that capital spending is one of his early priorities.

    ..

    Who'll be around to watch his speech at lunch?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    There's an element of instinctual human nature in there as well as social conditioning reinforcing it though. Men have a lot of pressure on them to be the provider (and many women will divorce a failure). I for example could never be the homemaker.

    The bigger concern for women (as with politics evidencing quite well) is not that women can't make it to the top but rather that because of how masculine the workplace is, the women that make it to the top are often not especially feminine in many of their traits and i imagine are seen as odd by many.

    In general though i'd say the above is a wider problem within feminism. Instead of pushing women to go further as themselves, for many women it's made them substantially less feminine.



    Not a fan of abandoning the target, i still believe that the state is too fat and greedy.

    With such a small spend it will be quite modest but it's good to see that capital spending is one of his early priorities.

    ..

    Who'll be around to watch his speech at lunch?
    The same person supports equalling pay for tennis matches (males earning more) but doesn't think women should be serving on the front line. I think the big frustration is that general concerns, such as easing the burden on women to be housewives and maternity repercussions (oh yeah, and the junior doctor contract) are getting merged with views that have nothing to do with equality at all and are just a measure designed to benefit women. I shudder to think the funding issues if breast cancer was a mainly male disease. Either you leave everything up to employers (who will take the "best") or you use quotas, across the board.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Welcome to the world of feminism, where a man being paid for overtime is sexist and that man is a rapist for ever looking anywhere near a woman. Where if you look at their body you're undressing them with your eyes, but if you don't you're body shaming them by refusing to look. And where they don't need no man, but need a leg up from the men to get anywhere in life.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I prefer to regard myself as a feminist opposing the current feminist movement, rather than being against "gender equality" - better to still support the actual cause than just remove yourself from it. That's part of the problem.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Manufacturing PMI increases to the highest level since June 2014. Apparently led by consumer demand.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    There's an element of instinctual human nature in there as well as social conditioning reinforcing it though. Men have a lot of pressure on them to be the provider (and many women will divorce a failure). I for example could never be the homemaker.

    The bigger concern for women (as with politics evidencing quite well) is not that women can't make it to the top but rather that because of how masculine the workplace is, the women that make it to the top are often not especially feminine in many of their traits and i imagine are seen as odd by many.

    In general though i'd say the above is a wider problem within feminism. Instead of pushing women to go further as themselves, for many women it's made them substantially less feminine.



    Not a fan of abandoning the target, i still believe that the state is too fat and greedy.

    With such a small spend it will be quite modest but it's good to see that capital spending is one of his early priorities.

    ..

    Who'll be around to watch his speech at lunch?
    The more I see of May the more I feel that you would be opposed to her.

    You seemed generally quite on board with the modernisers such as Cameron, Osborne, Gove and their low tax, low spend, small state*philosophy.

    May seems much more of a 1950s conservative, less keen on the free market but very socially conservative. Quite a few proposals so far I've liked, such as removing the retesting of disabled people, increasing spending on housing, *workers on the boards of companies, launching an investigation into workers rights.*

    Whether she follows through is another thing altogether but this seems a very different *Conservative party at the moment, at least in rhetoric.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You're kinda 11 weeks behind on that one, was announced almost immediately after Hammond started. Cameron and Osborne are being erased from history, not that it's hard particularly with George. Chancellors are rarely remembered if they don't go on to do something significant as PM, and Cameron was likely to be remembered as the PM who called a referendum and backed the wrong horse anyway, as much as he wanted to be remembered as the reformist.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would have thought you would have supported the more free market approach of Camborne rather than the one nation rhetoric of May.*
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 7, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Wake up and smell the...

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.