TheCat

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I *think* in fact I'm pretty sure that women are > now earning more than males at the youngest age > breaks. This isn't to say your general point isn't > true but there has been some progress. Correct. Women in their 20's now out-earn their male counterparts.

Jenny1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi TheCat. Of course no march, political protest > or indeed political party is going to be perfect. > You raise an interesting point about explaining > the banner 'The future is female' to your son. I > think if I were to discuss that with my nephew, or > one of my god sons, we would agree that this > slogan should not be seen as excluding them (if it > was written and carried in a spirit of exclusion - > then it would of course have been wrong). I think > we could have an interesting conversation about > how the vast majority of human history has seen > men in positions of economic, social and political > dominance and that this has led to a movement that > fights to re-balance that history. > > Piers Morgan's impressions of the Washington March > (and accompanying marches around the world) > disagree completely with my own. He concludes that > 'this march wasn't about women's rights' but was > rather a 'man-hating frenzy by some very nasty > women'. I doubt that's how most people will have > experienced it. That's a reasonable comment Jenny. I would probably argue the toss on the 'spirit' in which some (only some, not all) that these protesters carried such slogans. Feminists know very well the destructive 'power of words', and they should be equally careful with how they themselves word things. But anyway, I risk being deliberately obtuse when we have just reached an uneasy shared ground:)

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > When I read banners like "the future is female", > how am I meant to get on > > board with such a divisive slogan, and also look > my son in the eye and tell him that according to > > these people (who claim to espouse equality) the > future is not for him. > > many of us have a similar problem with regard to > our daughters, TheCat > how to look them in the eye and reassure them that > they might have an equal future, just like you'd > hope for your son, in spite of the divisive > rhetoric spouted by generations of men, of whom > Trump is just the latest > > the difference, though, which is that these girls > actually live, here and now, in a world where they > are worse off on every metric, and no sign of it > getting better. I also have a daughter, who I teach to be the best she can be. Full stop. Not "be the best you can be, despite the fact that you're female". By even bringing her gender into it, I'm giving her an excuse to blame someone else for any setbacks she may suffer. You almost had my support for your comment until you said females are worse off "on every metric". Which shows you've swallowed the 'female victimhood' arguement completely. Do a bit more research and you'll see there are many, many areas where girls and women are outperfOrm boys and men. Do I have a problem with these areas? Not at all...good on the girls...but to say that this is still a 'mans world' is to only see the facts that support your pre-existing position And referencing 'generations' of divisive male dominance and implying that this justifies divisive commentary in favour of females is just like saying two wrongs make a right. Why be divisive at all?

Jenny1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So TheCat and Mick Mac. What do you think about > Mike Pence's record on women's health issues? And > how would you (if you were American) feel about > the incoming administration as a result of that > record? Might you be moved to demonstrate to make > your views felt? (no matter if you were male or > female) > > Also specifically TheCat. Having heard the whole > of Madonna's speech (as I'm sure you have) .....do > you still feel Piers Morgan's interpretation to be > accurate? I don't disagree that Trump and his administration have issues with their perceptions of women in the world, and there are issues which should be protested. I do have issues with some of the rehortic around these marches, where I feel the extremist feminist element has let those who truly believe in equality down. When I read banners like "the future is female", how am I meant to get on board with such a divisive slogan, and also look my son in the eye and tell him that according to these people (who claim to espouse equality) the future is not for him. I haven't heard all of madonnas speech, as her shrieking is quite off-putting, but I have read a full transcript, and there's no getting around the fact that she said she has been thinking about blowing up the white house. Which for a public figure such as her to say is totally out of line in my view. Other than that, Jenny, where would you take issue with what piers Morgan has written?

So, I'm not a fan at all of Piers Morgan, and have similar views of the Daily Mail.....but given Piers has stirred up so much 'controversy' over his comments on the Women's March, I thought I'd go and read what he said in his article on the weekend.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4148206/PIERS-MORGAN-Madonna-Bomb-threats-don-t-Trump-hate.html Personally I cant say I disagree with too much that he has actually written here.....

As a leaver, I personally welcome this decision, as once parliament pass the vote to trigger Article 50, we should no longer have to hear anymore bleating about the fact that the referendum was only 'advisory'....

So are we meant to back to a full timetable tomorrow?

The behaviour of the gym staff member sounds pretty reprehensible, particularly with children around. However, my one point where I might challenged the op is that i believe (I've also only been there once) it seems pretty obvious as soon as one drives in off the street that it's a one way only system in that car park. There are 'one way arrows' painted on the road all the way around. Doesn't excuse the behaviour of the person in question in anycase.

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > So this protest is named after only one gender, > > and all of the speakers and performers are > > exclusively one gender.....but it's for > > 'everyone'.... > > > > Hmmmmmmm..... > > hmmmm indeed > it's quite possible that marches don't achieve > anything - but at last they give people a reason > to assemble visibly to support or protest. the > right of public assembly is precious and people > have suffered to protect it > > so no men are assembling - why don't you do > something about that instead of hmmm-ing and > hawing? Hmmmmmmm.....haaaawwwww......No.

So this protest is named after only one gender, and all of the speakers and performers are exclusively one gender.....but it's for 'everyone'.... Hmmmmmmm.....

Jenny1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think simply being a member of a lot of > international institutions constitutes effective > and economically beneficial global engagement > TheCat. The point about the UK's EU membership (as > far as global investors are concerned)is that it > gives the UK unfettered access to a market which > they want to reach as well. Investing in the UK > has - until now - given them a gateway to that > market. As Karan Bilimoria (founder of Cobra Beer) > pointed out when he accompanied TM on that recent > gig to India. He'd been part of similar > delegations in the past when Indian investors had > been all over them...not any more. Germany and > Japan are now the favoured investment options. the point made was about international collaboration. Not global investment.

Frank Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi TheCat, > Of course life inside the EU also comes with a > whole set of challenges. But I don't know any > Remainer who is a afraid of a challenge. But > Russian Roulette is not a challenge ... it is > plain stupid. Theresa May's speech makes very > clear where her priorities are ... and close > international collaboration with your neighbours > is not among them. Rather she spoke of making > Britain Great again ... That is not a challenge, > that is merely short-sighted. I respectfully disagree with the point about international collaboration. Many Remainers seem to think that leaving the EU means we're shutting ourself off from the world...well The United Kingdom is a member of the G7, G20, NATO, all the UN bodies (not to mention having a permanent seat at the celebrated 'top table'), the Council of Europe, the OSCE, and the OECD, without starting on the Asian Development Bank (of which we're a nonregional member), the AfDB (nonregional member), the Arctic Council (observer), the Australia Group, the BIS, C, CBSS (observer), CD, CDB, CE, CERN, EAPC, EBRD, ECB, EIB, EITI (implementing country), ESA, FAO, FATF, the IADB, IAEA, the IBRD and the ICAO, the ICC (national committees), the ICCt, ICRM, IDA, IEA, IFAD, IFC, and the IFRCS, the IGAD (partners), the IHO, ILO, IMF, IMO, IMSO, Interpol, IOC, IOM, IPU, ISO, ITSO, ITU, ITUC (NGOs), MIGA, MINUSMA, MONUSCO, NEA, NSG, OAS (observer), OPCW, Pacific Alliance (observer), Paris Club, PCA, PIF (partner), SELEC (observer), SICA (observer), the WIPO, WMO, WTO, and the Zanger Committee....doesnt sound like a lack of international collaboration to me..... Why does everything hinge on our membership of a limping political project on the western end of the Eurasian landmass?

cerv Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Question for those that have still been braving > > the train.....on the non-strike days are they > > still only running one per hour because of the > > overtime ban? and is it even worth trying for a > > train about 7am from ED? > > > > I've been driving, but am wondering if its > worth > > dipping my toe back in the water.... > > Check the National Rail journey planner for what's > running, they do update it to reflect the current > situation. To answer your question yes we have > been back to one train an hour recently. I think > at the moment there's a train just before 7 and > then the next is 7.30 but you should always check > before you set off in case there's a last minute > cancellation Yeah, thanks....can check the trains no problem, but more keen to know what the level of crowding is on these irregular services around this time of day...

Question for those that have still been braving the train.....on the non-strike days are they still only running one per hour because of the overtime ban? and is it even worth trying for a train about 7am from ED? I've been driving, but am wondering if its worth dipping my toe back in the water....

Lorelei Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Very pleased to see this. I am horrified by the > PM's speeach today where she has publicly stated > that she will play russian roulette with the > future of the UK. No responsible PM should use > that kind of threat. We need to start being much > more organised and active. I will be happy to join > you. 'Rusian roulette' hey?......I suppose you think life in the EU has been totally stable and predictable over the past few years too....

tigerranks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > STEVEO > > UR AN IDIOT Do you think STEVEO can now sue you for slander?

Happy Cyclist Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Due to the input from ubcleglen and zebedee tring, > the list has been amended. > > 1-dragon poo > 2-dog poo > 3-cat poo > 4-bird poo > 5-human poo > 6-fox poo This thread is swiftly tuning into poo itself....EDF Poo must be at the top... I have to agree with Zebedee Tring, who would have though complaining about dogs sh!tting on the street would be so controversial....

Toosmart1973 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > You need to get a life mate! > > Its a 7 second job with a bucket of water! If > selfish people like you stopped paving over their > gardens so they can park their precious cars then > dogs might not need to take a dump on the > pavement. as opposed to the 7 second job of the dog owner to pick up his own dog's shite?

Despite people mocking the OP for using his/her cctv for this purpose, I support this post 100percent. I live on beauval road, and the amount of dog mess on the pavement on Beauval, Dovercourt and parts of Woodward road is disgraceful. Walking with family/children/buggies can sometimes feel like negotiating a minefield on these roads. I would assume it's unlikely to be residents of these roads either, I guess these roads seem like quiet 'cut throughs' if you're walking from the village/park to lordship lane, and people hope that no one will notice them letting their dog dump on the pavement. I will confront someone's if I see them letting it happen without cleaning up, in the absence of that I fully support cctv, drones, neighbourhood watch or whatever means nessary to get people to stop letting their dog mess outside my front door. I can't fathom how people can just be so lazy and inconsiderate. There are bins at both ends of beauval road, so there really is no excuse.

Bloody immigrants...

geobz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its been more than a month now that services to > and from ED have been cut by half. > > I'd like to hear how has it affected other people > around that their work is not so open on them > coming in late / leaving early and WFH when there > is a strike. For me it basically doesn't matter whether its an official 'strike' day or not, with the ongoing overtime ban, the services from Dulwich are a shambles every single day. One train an hour? might as well be none for all the chances of squeezing on. I have ended up driving to work, paying a fortune in parking and congestion charge. Some people may say that's wasteful as I could get on a bus or bike; but I have an injury that prevents me riding a bike for a while, and im far too grumpy already in the mornings (on a good day) to stomach being 'sardined' into a bus.... How this can continue though, I dont know...

I didn't realise there was anything smaller than a fifty....

Yeah, it's shocking that it takes this long to get anywhere central when you consider most of Dulwich is in zone 2.....

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Zebedee Tring Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > FFS, when I used the word "attacked", I meant > it > > in the metaphorical sense of "criticised". That > > should have been obvious from the context > > > > It was obvious. > > I disagree that she's been criticised to a level > that could be described as an attack. People have > questioned aspects of the story. If you're going > to stick something like this on a public forum and > get everyone scared, people are naturally going to > question elements of the story. > > In my opinion this whole thread should never have > been started, and it should have been left for > police and local schools to decide how much to > advertise things. But it was started, so people > have a right to comment / question as they see > fit. While I also have my own questions on the incident. I would not so far as to say this post should not have been started. Making people aware is priority number 1. Then semantics later. I would not want any one else to be dissuaded from posting something similar on here, as the public message is more important than worrying about being questioned for your actions.... I appreciate the op as a parent. So thanks

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And sometimes parents drive because they are > selfish and are poor at time management. I'll agree that the road behavior of some parents when dropping off/picking up is pretty abhorrent. But assuming common decency and all road rules are followed, who is the arbiter of what constitutes a non-selfish reason to use public roads?