Turn on thread page Beta

One of Labour's top two posts should always be held by a woman watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I can’t believe Ms Harman can get away with making statements like this.

    “One of Labour's top two posts should always be held by a woman, Deputy Leader Harriet Harman has told a paper”

    “She does "not agree with all-male leaderships" because men "cannot be left to run things on their own" she told the Sunday Times.” --to me this is so sexist and if a man said this about women, he would be forced to resign.

    And Under her controversial new equality bill, women will find it easier to demand equal pay and employers will be given a legal right to discriminate in favour of female candidates.

    That’s like saying, just because there are more women at universities, we should favour more male students rather than making men work harder in their exams!

    Its about time men voted her out as their MP, she does nothing for men and gets their vote to get in to power and rants and makes sexist laws against men.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrBOOBOO)
    I can’t believe Ms Harman can get away with making statements like this.

    “One of Labour's top two posts should always be held by a woman, Deputy Leader Harriet Harman has told a paper”

    “She does "not agree with all-male leaderships" because men "cannot be left to run things on their own" she told the Sunday Times.” --to me this is so sexist and if a man said this about women, he would be forced to resign.

    And Under her controversial new equality bill, women will find it easier to demand equal pay and employers will be given a legal right to discriminate in favour of female candidates.

    That’s like saying, just because there are more women at universities, we should favour more male students rather than making men work harder in their exams!

    Its about time men voted her out as their MP, she does nothing for men and gets their vote to get in to power and rants and makes sexist laws against men.
    thats very true. surely it should be based on competency, not gender - i'd much rather have two good women in power/two good men in power

    as opposed to one good woman in power and a **** man in power, or even a good man in power and a **** woman in power

    however, equal pay sounds right, its agreeable

    not the positive discrimination though, she seems to be quite ignorant

    ah well she won't be in power for much longer
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    That's absolutely ridiculous. She should be forced to resign after that comment, she's so incredibly sexist it's unreal.

    I'd maybe understand, maybe, if she had been referring to the idea that this would allow women to be better represented in parliament (although still silly, as it should be who is most qualified for the job regardless of sex), but ''men cannot be left to run things on their own"? They've done it successfully enough in a lot of areas for centuries, yes it was without choice, but a totally unfounded comment all the same.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    thats very true. surely it should be based on competency, not gender - i'd much rather have two good women in power/two good men in power

    as opposed to one good woman in power and a **** man in power, or even a good man in power and a **** woman in power

    however, equal pay sounds right, its agreeable

    not the positive discrimination though, she seems to be quite ignorant

    ah well she won't be in power for much longer

    They do get equal pay, as doctors, teachers ect..
    But in some jobs its hard to measure, Some company's pay men more because they value that man.....supply and demand.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrBooBoo)
    And Under her controversial new equality bill ... employers will be given a legal right to discriminate in favour of female candidates.
    Nope. The provision only kicks in if the candidates are equally qualified and desirable.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't care if it is run by two men, two women, or two monkeys.
    If the job gets done well, who cares?!
    I wouldn't employ an incompetent woman just to avoid a sexist panel.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    What a crazy fool. I bet she's with Sheila's Wheels as well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrBOOBOO)
    They do get equal pay, as doctors, teachers ect..
    But in some jobs its hard to measure, Some company's pay men more because they value that man.....supply and demand.
    Yeah i thought so (or would like to think so)

    but this woman is a complete and utter idiot, at least Gordon tried to do something (even if it had little or no impact)

    she seems a bit two-faced - she supported the Iraqi war, and then claimed she "didn't know about WMD" when the iraqi war soured public opinion

    "One of the complaints of the protesters was that Harman had refused their requests for a meeting, yet she denied that they had even requested such a meeting. It emerged that Harman's statement was a lie when Fathers 4 Justice published a previous letter from her refusing the request for a meeting."

    just thank god we've only got a few more months before the 2010 elections

    roll on Lib Dems!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Nope. The provision only kicks in if the candidates are equally qualified and desirable.
    MAybe it should kick in the education system, and let men go to uni more? or maybe they should be helped to work harder and change the system a bit.

    More young men are unemployed than young women, maybe it should kick in and give the jobs to men if the candidates are equally desirable???

    Its funny when men are disadvantage they don't cry for special treatment.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    Yeah i thought so (or would like to think so)

    but this woman is a complete and utter idiot, at least Gordon tried to do something (even if it had little or no impact)

    she seems a bit two-faced - she supported the Iraqi war, and then claimed she "didn't know about WMD" when the iraqi war soured public opinion

    "One of the complaints of the protesters was that Harman had refused their requests for a meeting, yet she denied that they had even requested such a meeting. It emerged that Harman's statement was a lie when Fathers 4 Justice published a previous letter from her refusing the request for a meeting."

    just thank god we've only got a few more months before the 2010 elections

    roll on Lib Dems!

    I think when Labour is voted out, she will still be MP.
    Its about time, men stopped giving her the vote.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Can't wait till she gets kicked out on her arse.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Nope. The provision only kicks in if the candidates are equally qualified and desirable.
    So never then, which of course begs the question, why bring in that legislation at all?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nefarious)
    So never then, which of course begs the question, why bring in that legislation at all?
    Not necessarily- this is the complaint of many employers; candidates are all to often in possession of the same qualifications and backgrounds for them to pick between them on simply merit. Particularly those from academic backgrounds. For example, a male and a female candidate both having a first class degree in history, four A-Levels at grade A, 10 GCSE's at A* to C, Duke of Edinburgh award etc.
    I think it's naive to say that candidates are never equal- they often are.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If it was a man saying this about a woman, there would be uproar.

    Maybe she should just **** off and get back in the kitchen. : D
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lateralus)
    If it was a man saying this about a woman, there would be uproar.

    Maybe she should just **** off and get back in the kitchen. : D
    this

    she annoys me so much. And she always makes up lies, she was like I think its arrogant that the tories say they are going to win, 1-they are, 2-they never said it, 3-I think its arrogant that she thinks she can stay in office after being such an epic failure
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dannymccs)
    Not necessarily- this is the complaint of many employers; candidates are all to often in possession of the same qualifications and backgrounds for them to pick between them on simply merit. Particularly those from academic backgrounds. For example, a male and a female candidate both having a first class degree in history, four A-Levels at grade A, 10 GCSE's at A* to C, Duke of Edinburgh award etc.
    I think it's naive to say that candidates are never equal- they often are.
    And at interview they'll have performed in the same way too, will have exactly the same motivations, commitment levels, will be equally well rounded as people, will have the same extra curricular stuff etc. etc. It's not all about the grades you know.

    People are always different. If you can't see that then the way you're assessing people is flawed and you need to update your recruitment procedure rather than perpetuating the idea that to discriminate by Gender/ Race / Disability is ok.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Nope. The provision only kicks in if the candidates are equally qualified and desirable.
    Even still, I can see no tangible reason as to why they should get preference.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This is what you get for voting New Labour.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'd *** on her face, for that comment and make her swallow. :awesome:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    She didn't actually say that she doesn't want men in the top positions, she just said that there must also be a woman. If a male MP said that, I think people would consider it perfectly fair. It doesn't make sense that the population is roughly half half male:female ration, but the government isn't - it shows a clear fault in the representative system. And frankly, in times of discrimination, affirmative action is needed until there is no longer discrimination. Makes perfect sense.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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