Feminists anger over bank notes

All Florence nightingale did was keep things clean and it was because she believed in miasmas... Not bacteria the death rate in the hospital increased when she was there also

That argument it totally flawed

also it's not fair to say that a women's achievement is more credible just because she is a wowoman for example first woman doctor etexcite the same achievement a man made

I agree with the point that its silly for feminists to get upset about this....
Li feel they frequently claim they want equality but only if it favours them..... For example at least 50% of employees have to be female which means that there's basically always more females than makes in a lot of corporate companies which is ridiculous but I would say hat your argument is flawed
churchill is massively overreacted and did a lot of bad for example returning 20,000 soldering to Stalin knowing everyone would be shot and over looks that Katy's massacre knowing full well that it was Russia and not Germany lot of things about the Cold War are overlooked because of ww1 which is wrong but whilst I disagree with your reason why I totally agree with your argument


This is my comment from earlier which I told your to read

i did not slate Florence nightingale and how many times do I have to say that she achieved a lot before it goes into your head

yes she did achieve less than Churchill but that is beside the point. I already said I think aneurin Bevin would be more aappropriate
you are trying to tell what what I believe which is absolutely ridicululous as I've said three times that agree with your point but your argument for it is not a good one

They're not real men though. The real men in medicine become highly paid surgeons, drive expensive cars, and bang all the nurses on the side.

The poster did say during the war. Although I do agree with Rosalind Franklin, I disagree with the other 2.

Besides, a woman doesn't have to be on a bank note. Maybe next time round they can put a woman on a note, but it shouldn't be a requirement.

Positive discrimination is as bad as negative. I absolutely agree that what sex the person is should play no role whatsoever in deciding who to honour on our bank notes. Honour the people who have done the most for our country, regardless of sex.

That's your opinion, you're telling me something as if it is a fact, it is an opinion, as I've said many times the argument that you think I'm making is not that at all!

I don't think there's any malicious intent behind the decision, but I do think it rather questionable that there apparently isn't one woman deemed worthy enough to feature on a bank note (apart from the Queen, who is there by accident of birth). After all, the only reason women haven't historically been as prominent in their achievements as men is because of their historical oppression, politically and socially. Whilst these men were doing their undoubtedly great deeds, they were probably supported by the women in their lives who worked just as hard and without credit in running their households. As women do make up 50% of the population, I think it would be the least they could manage to find one to put on a bank note - and I'm sure there are plenty of great women to choose from. I don't think that's a lot to ask really.

Churchill was personally responsible for the Black and Tans, and also the Auxiliaries in Ireland, who killed a lot of civilians. Even George V was horrified with what they got up to, and this did tarnish Churchill's reputation, both in Britain and Ireland. However the events of WWII made him a National Hero, and on the whole, rehabilitated him.

So if Hitler done whatever it was that he done to rehabilitate himself, would he be on bank notes?

Nah I think they should have a gay black working class disabled muslim woman

gender fluid*

But then you're oppressing the gendergas transspecies cissublinated types.

Of all the things feminists could be angry about like unequal pay, under-representation in politics, under-representation in the board-room, slut-shaming etc they pick this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346372/Woman-oust-Churchill-new-5-note-feminists-say-time-change.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Basically Churchill has been chosen to replaces Elizabeth Fry in the £5 note instead of another woman. I think it is a ridiculous thing to complain about because no woman has achieved as much as Churchill did during the war and in my opinion he is fully deserving of featuring on the £5 note. I do not believe in positive discrimination and think that people should be chosen on their merits and not because of their sexual organs. It is annoying that because of this uproar we are likely to get a woman on the £10 note when that is next changed, when their are people like Nelson who deserve national recognition.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346372/Woman-oust-Churchill-new-5-note-feminists-say-time-change.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Basically Churchill has been chosen to replaces Elizabeth Fry in the £5 note instead of another woman. I think it is a ridiculous thing to complain about because no woman has achieved as much as Churchill did during the war and in my opinion he is fully deserving of featuring on the £5 note. I do not believe in positive discrimination and think that people should be chosen on their merits and not because of their sexual organs. It is annoying that because of this uproar we are likely to get a woman on the £10 note when that is next changed, when their are people like Nelson who deserve national recognition.