# Harriet Harman is off again



## Paul_Stewart (Jul 23, 2013)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/23424137

Now it's cycling as the world just ignored her about golf.  Surely if she wants real equality, the men and women would have to compete together.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 23, 2013)

It does explain in the link that Women cannot compete in the same tour sections as men as it would be to arduous for them.  This is why She wants the previous race resurrected.

Difficult as it is I seem to be in agreement with her


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 23, 2013)

I wish she would fight for true equality at Wimbledon and other Grand Slams

If they are going to be 'paid the same', the Ladies should play best of 5 sets too!


----------



## Sweep (Jul 23, 2013)

She says that "after the success of the Olympics" and "Britain has some of the best women cyclists in the world". Yes dear. But even though it is starting in Yorkshire next year, it's a French race. The clue is in the name.
I would be much more willing to take her seriously if she just once actually supported true equality and not back door feminism.
In the end, a women's race will happen if there is enough interest. It all comes down to economics and I doubt Mrs. Harman would be willing to risk her own money.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 23, 2013)

I quite like Harriet, she has a bit of a brain on her and a mind of her own.

Not your normal rent a quote politician.

I think history will be kind to her.


----------



## Iaing (Jul 23, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think history will be kind to her.
		
Click to expand...

Hopefully soon!


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 23, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I quite like Harriet, she has a bit of a brain on her and a mind of her own.

Not your normal rent a quote politician.

I think history will be kind to her.
		
Click to expand...

What about all that workplace discrimination she pushed through just before being kicked out.   No joking in the office!!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 24, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I quite like Harriet, she has a bit of a brain on her and a mind of her own.

Not your normal rent a quote politician.

I think history will be kind to her.
		
Click to expand...

Sadly Doon, only a bit of a brain out weighed by a huge gob!


----------



## Paul_Stewart (Jul 24, 2013)

chrisd said:



			Sadly Doon, only a bit of a brain out weighed by a huge gob!
		
Click to expand...

It would be terribly impolite to associate the words "woman" and "normal" in this conversion ......


----------



## Tiger (Jul 24, 2013)

Didn't see this coming. A pro equality, senior female politician being criticised by a bunch of men on a golf forum... 

PS having actually met Harriet Harman I can concur with Doon that she is indeed a sharp lady


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 24, 2013)

Tiger said:



			Didn't see this coming. A pro equality, senior female politician being criticised by a bunch of men on a golf forum... 

Click to expand...

Me neither, it's a depressingly inevitable shock isn't it.

And for the last time equality does not mean that men and women should, or want to compete in the same events in most sports.   Why not say that until they we all go in the same toilets then there will not be true equality?  How about until men have to give birth then there will never be true equality?

So for those who always bring this argument about up to justify excluding women and put down any woman who mentions equality then please stop it and come up with a slightly more intelligent reason why you are opposed to it.  As it makes you look an ignorant Daily Mail reading arse. IMHO.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 24, 2013)

As well as the normal quota of women haters I can only assume that quite a few 'blokes' on here have women bosses.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Harman is a politician, therefore one must assume there is a self serving cynical motivation to this. The countdown to the next election has already begun, with Tory measures on welfare and Europe intended to draw the UKIP supporters back in. Presumably Labour have decided that the women's vote is critical, so they produce this sort of crap. 

The irony, of course, is that Labour have transformed themselves from a party created by unions to a party supporting the city and free market. The free market has placed relative values on male versus female activities, and if there was a popular or commercial rationale for a women's Tour, there would be one already.

Harriet is a cynical politician. All women shortlists are used when needed to shoehorn in a favoured candidate. No all women shortlist was applied when her husband Jack Dromey wanted a safe seat. 

Interestingly, in other domains, women earn a lot more than men. Modelling (or various sorts), for one, and ahem, adult movies. I expect that as a champion of equality, Harriet Harperson will shortly be demanding equitable treatment for male porn stars and male catwalk models.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Tiger said:



			Didn't see this coming. A pro equality, senior female politician being criticised by a bunch of men on a golf forum... 

PS having actually met Harriet Harman I can concur with Doon that she is indeed a sharp lady
		
Click to expand...

She is not pro-equality. She is a cynical self serving politician who picks and chooses where she demands equality in accordance to the electoral or financial payoff attached. 

Being sharp means she is just rather good at it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			She is not pro-equality. She is a cynical self serving politician who picks and chooses where she demands equality in accordance to the electoral or financial payoff attached. 

Being sharp means she is just rather good at it.
		
Click to expand...

Somehow quoting female models and porn stars has not really helped your argument.
Was that the first thing you thought of?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

I think she's one of the few conviction politicians we have and an absolute shining light amongst the dross in parliament. She obviously feels strongly about the inequities women face in our patriarchal society and has decided to stand up and speak out against it knowing full well the level of abuse and ridicule she will take from misogynists everywhere.

Lots of hatred of all-female selection lists and no comment whatsoever on the fact that only 1 in 5 MPs is female. They may be a crude approach to tackling this problem but how else can this be addressed? Actually don't answer; I'm sure most of you already think there are too many female MPs. 



Ethan said:



			Interestingly, in other domains, women earn a lot more than men. Modelling (or various sorts), for one, and ahem, adult movies. I expect that as a champion of equality, Harriet Harperson will shortly be demanding equitable treatment for male porn stars and male catwalk models.
		
Click to expand...

Now I've heard it all, porn as a bastion of anti-male discrimination.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Somehow quoting female models and porn stars has not really helped your argument.
Was that the first thing you thought of?
		
Click to expand...

It was deliberately chosen to illustrate that Harman is cynically choosing a subject she thinks will resonate with the public. Other unpopular or contentious subjects will be avoided. 

The real issue here is that the next election campaign has started. The Tories are focussing on the UKIP voters, hence Europe, justice, immigration etc. Labour have a lead in the polls, but they know it is fragile, and every time Ed Miliband opens his mouth, it is vulnerable. Harman is reminding people she is there, and is one of those sharpening their knives to use in stabbing Miliband in the back in time to allow a new leader to take Labour into the election. 

Her statement on a womens TdF is an easy no-cost piece of fluff. She doesn't care whether a womens race is set up or not, and she knows that if women wanted one, it would already happen. But some people will agree strongly with her, many will give some support, and very few will strongly object. So, no cost to her, and she has a talking point to raise between now and the start of the TdF in the UK next year.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Lots of hatred of all-female selection lists and no comment whatsoever on the fact that only 1 in 5 MPs is female. They may be a crude approach to tackling this problem but how else can this be addressed?
		
Click to expand...

How about - on merit?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

chrisd said:



			How about - on merit?
		
Click to expand...

Do you think 1 in 5 represents a meritocracy?


----------



## Tiger (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Now I've heard it all, porn as a bastion of anti-male discrimination.
		
Click to expand...

:thup:

And speaking of porn there is probably a correlation between the Government finally taking a stand on child internet porn (long overdue) and the arrival of the Royal baby. Are we seeing the start of political posturing as we have the long build up to the General Election? Of course. Doesn't detract from HHs efforts for equality in my mind though


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

The Tour de France is a commercial enterprise and it's primary purpose is to make money for everyone involved.  It is not to give male cyclists the opportunity to express themselves through the medium of cycling, to promote healthy living and exercise through cycling or provide a platform for the best male cyclists in the world to display to compete to find the ultimate cyclist.  It's to make money, and if it didn't make money it wouldn't take place.

I'm sure if Harriet wants to bank roll a Tour de France for women then one could be organised.  If not, she should shut up about things that don't concern her and get on with representing her constituents.  I very much doubt that the subject of a Tour de France for women has been a hot topic at any of her recent constituency surgeries.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Do you think 1 in 5 represents a meritocracy?
		
Click to expand...

It represents a fair result given that only 21% of the candidates that stood for election last time round were women.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I quite like Harriet, she has a bit of a brain on her and a mind of her own.

Not your normal rent a quote politician.

I think history will be kind to her.
		
Click to expand...

I do to.  I get the impression that for some - as soon as she opens her mouth then what she is saying is leftie rubbish.  But actually she is usually expresses a concern held by a significant section of our population suppoerted by a reasoned and thought-through argument - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  Indeed - this time 70,000 have signed a petition asking for a women's race.  That's a lot of petitioners.  She is giving senior politial voice to that wish.  A good and resoponsible thing.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Somehow quoting female models and porn stars has not really helped your argument.
Was that the first thing you thought of?
		
Click to expand...

^^^This - depressingly cynical comments from @Ethan there I'm afraid


----------



## cookelad (Jul 24, 2013)

If someone sat in his or her chÃ¢teau thinks that putting on a female TdF will create more income than the value of the effort it takes to stage it, THEN it will happen not because an English (as loved as we are in France) politician thinks it should!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

stevie_r said:



			It represents a fair result given that only 21% of the candidates that stood for election last time round were women.
		
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I do to.  I get the impression that for some - as soon as she opens her mouth then what she is saying is leftie rubbish.  But actually she is usually expresses a concern held by a significant section of our population suppoerted by a reasoned and thought-through argument - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  Indeed - this time 70,000 have signed a petition asking for a women's race.  That's a lot of petitioners.  She is giving senior politial voice to that wish.  A good and resoponsible thing.
		
Click to expand...

Are all the folk who signed the petition willing to pay their share to make sure it takes place?  I doubt it...


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think she's one of the few conviction politicians we have and an absolute shining light amongst the dross in parliament. She obviously feels strongly about the inequities women face in our patriarchal society and has decided to stand up and speak out against it knowing full well the level of abuse and ridicule she will take from misogynists everywhere.

Lots of hatred of all-female selection lists and no comment whatsoever on the fact that only 1 in 5 MPs is female. They may be a crude approach to tackling this problem but how else can this be addressed? Actually don't answer; I'm sure most of you already think there are too many female MPs.
		
Click to expand...


She isn't a conviction politician. She is someone using a particular issue to advance her career. 

All female selection lists are used cynically when Labour wants to force in a pro-Union or pro-Progress (modern wing of Labour) insider. Otherwise, they do not use lists, such as when they want a safe seat for a fool like Dromey, aka Mr Harman. 

You are being taken for a ride if you think Harman is a genuine champion for women.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

ger147 said:



			Are all the folk who signed the petition willing to pay their share to make sure it takes place?  I doubt it...
		
Click to expand...

What's cost got to do with it.  If the TdF comes back and says that the reason it's not holding a womens race is the cost of it then you deal with that when it arises.  But first you ask the question.


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			What's cost got to do with it.  If the TdF comes back and says that the reason it's not holding a womens race is the cost of it then you deal with that when it arises.  But first you ask the question.
		
Click to expand...

It's already been stated that the reason is cost...


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.
		
Click to expand...

You are making a massive assumption there that if the selection process was somehow fairer for women then 50% of candidates would be women.  It aint necessarily so


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			EXACTLY!

So the problem isn't with the electorate, it's with the candidate selection process.
		
Click to expand...

Er. Perhaps more to do with the Candidates for Selection.

Changing the Candidate Selection Process seems a bit like corruption to me! And a policy of All-Women Shortlists certainly is imo! And it broke the law too!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			Er. Perhaps more to do with the Candidates for Selection.

Changing the Candidate Selection Process seems a bit like corruption to me! And a policy of All-Women Shortlists certainly is imo!
		
Click to expand...

The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....
		
Click to expand...

So if the selection process puts forward 4 men for every woman I'm going to make the fairly safe assumption that 4 times as many men wish to enter the process; unless of course you have evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps more women have the good sense, or ethical reasons, not to get involved in politics?


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

If she cares about women's cycling so much:

1) Why is she not pushing for a grand tour for women in the UK instead of expecting a private company in a foreign country to stage one for British female cyclists to take part in?
2) As a senior cabinet minister at the time, where was she in 2009 when the last female Tour de France equivalent was held in 2009 - 3 stages due to be held in the UK were cancelled due to a lack of funding.  I don't remember her stepping in back then?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			The candidate selection process puts 4 men forward for every woman; it desperately needs changing. Believe it or not I'm not a supporter of all-woman shortlists either but the current gender imbalance in parliament is an even bigger travesty; which nobody on here seems willing to acknowledge....
		
Click to expand...

I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.

Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.

Btw. From what I understand - and it's hearsay only - there is considerable resistance in the NHS for equality in the Nursing field - in the other direction of course!


----------



## chrisd (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Do you think 1 in 5 represents a meritocracy?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not in the least bit concerned whether 1 in 5 in favour of men or women or any other variation, I just want the best person available for the job! 

Positive discrimination is still discrimination to me


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.

Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.

Btw. From what I understand - and it's hearsay only - there is considerable resistance in the NHS for equality in the Nursing field - in the other direction of course!
		
Click to expand...

FD is confusing equality and equity. People often do. If the ratio of candidates who are put forward is 1:4, then the current system is equitable. Equality is not necessarily a desirable outcome. Harman certainly doesn't believe in it with regard to the rights of divorced fathers.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			I'm certainly happy to acknowledge it as an issue. But not as a travesty.
		
Click to expand...

Of course not, but imagine the next parliament only had 20% men; you wouldn't be happy!



Foxholer said:



			Do you have the figures for the ratio of candidates put forward for Candidate Selection though. I don't, but I'd suggest it's pretty much the same ratio! So getting more (capable) women to put themselves for candidates should be the aim. Work from the ground up, not just the top down.
		
Click to expand...

No I don't either, would be interesting to see these. I do agree the reasons for the lack of women in parliament goes beyond sexism in the selection process.


----------



## Tiger (Jul 24, 2013)

If we are talking about why we don't get as many female, black and minority ethnic or disabled individuals seeking to become politicians the problem lies in the current system not with apathy from those groups. Whether we like it or not there are barriers and glass ceilings that still remain in Britain that perpetuate the status quo.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			FD is confusing equality and equity. People often do. If the ratio of candidates who are put forward is 1:4, then the current system is equitable. Equality is not necessarily a desirable outcome. Harman certainly doesn't believe in it with regard to the rights of divorced fathers.
		
Click to expand...

Not at all. 1:4 is far to great a disparity to claim that equity has been applied. Something is amiss in the way our MPs are selected. Even if the answer is that for various reasons less women put themselves forward that is still inequitable. 

Don't get me started on the lords......

Stepping backwards a minute, I think the MPs in parliament should represent a rough cross section of society. Gender being the biggest single differential I think there would be a roughly 50/50 split in an ideal world. Is that a reasonable aspiration?


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Of course not, but imagine the next parliament only had 20% men; you wouldn't be happy!
		
Click to expand...

You have neither the right nor the competence to make that statement!


----------



## Tiger (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			You have neither the right nor the competence to make that statement!
		
Click to expand...

I hope this is missing a wink smiley


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not at all. 1:4 is far to great a disparity to claim that equity has been applied. Something is amiss in the way our MPs are selected. Even if the answer is that for various reasons less women put themselves forward that is still inequitable. 

Don't get me started on the lords......

Stepping backwards a minute, I think the MPs in parliament should represent a rough cross section of society. Gender being the biggest single differential I think there would be a roughly 50/50 split in an ideal world. Is that a reasonable aspiration?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the concept of equity. 

Anyway, is that a reasonable aspiration? Perhaps, if similar numbers of women and men want, and are suitably qualified, to be MPs. Should doctors, teachers, police etc etc all be equally 50/50?

The point about equity is that if the ratio of men and women coming forward for nomination is 1:4, then ending up with a similar ratio among selected candidates is equitable. Otherwise, you either have to construct an argument that the women nominees are on average better (however defined, XX or XY genotype excepted), and therefore are being discriminated against in the selection process, or they are much the same but it is reasonable to select less well qualified women just because they are women. 

Does the same logic extend to ethnic groups, social class, age ranges, gay vs straight, etc etc?

Personally I would be very happy to discriminate against career politicians of either gender, or Michael Gove, who have come from Oxbridge with a PPE degree, worked as a special adviser or lobbyist before being inserted into a safe seat.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not at all. 1:4 is far to great a disparity to claim that equity has been applied. Something is amiss in the way our MPs are selected. Even if the answer is that for various reasons less women put themselves forward that is still inequitable. 

Don't get me started on the lords......

Stepping backwards a minute, I think the MPs in parliament should represent a rough cross section of society. Gender being the biggest single differential I think there would be a roughly 50/50 split in an ideal world. Is that a reasonable aspiration?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it is a reasonable aspiration, it makes sense. However,  you are still claiming that something is wrong with the way the selection process works -even if less women put themselves forward?  So presumably to achieve a 50/ 50 split we should either press gang women into politics or select a less able woman over a man in the interests of trying reach an aspirational target.

Just because women make up 50% of the population doesn't mean you are ever likely to achieve an even split across the whole of society in all things.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

Tiger said:



			I hope this is missing a wink smiley
		
Click to expand...

No, it quite deliberately doesn't - and nor does this one!

Explain to me how someone who has never met me can make such a bald unqualified statement.

If the words 'I don't think/believe' were included, then fine - that's opinion. But as-is, my statement stands.

And as it happens, it's probably wrong. And, imo, merely reflects badly on FD's 'equality' intentions.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			No, it quite deliberately doesn't - and nor does this one!

Explain to me how someone who has never met me can make such a bald unqualified statement.

If the words 'I don't think/believe' were included, then fine - that's opinion. But as-is, my statement stands.

And as it happens, it's probably wrong. And, imo, merely reflects badly on FD's 'equality' intentions.
		
Click to expand...

I think the smiley was probably missing from _my_ post. <deep sigh>


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			I don't think you understand the concept of equity. 

<snip>

The point about equity is that if the ratio of men and women coming forward for nomination is 1:4, then ending up with a similar ratio among selected candidates is equitable. Otherwise, you either have to construct an argument that the women nominees are on average better (however defined, XX or XY genotype excepted), and therefore are being discriminated against in the selection process, or they are much the same but it is reasonable to select less well qualified women just because they are women. 

Does the same logic extend to ethnic groups, social class, age ranges, gay vs straight, etc etc?
		
Click to expand...

I think I do, but clearly put a broader interpretation on "fairness" than you do. You are confining your argument to the actual selection process where of the proportion of people coming forward you assume the same proportion is eventually selected (although I don't think we've seen any figures to either back up or refute that hypothesis). Within those terms, yes , it is equitable. In the broader context I suggest that some other inequities place a barrier to women coming forward for selection.

Yes, in my mythical ideal world all sections of society would be represented in parliament.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think I do, but clearly put a broader interpretation on "fairness" than you do. You are confining your argument to the actual selection process where of the proportion of people coming forward you assume the same proportion is eventually selected (although I don't think we've seen any figures to either back up or refute that hypothesis). Within those terms, yes , it is equitable. In the broader context I suggest that some other inequities place a barrier to women coming forward for selection.

Yes, in my mythical ideal world all sections of society would be represented in parliament.
		
Click to expand...

Please. Fairness is a complicated concept, and in your case, a broader interpretation simply means you can keep arguing that things are unfair just because it seems that way to you even if you can't find specific arguments. You made the accusation but now it seems you don't have the facts to back it.

Equality and equity are often in conflict, and sometimes rightly so, so when you trot out the idea that something is unfair, you have to say what you mean. In terms of equality, the gender breakdown currently is clearly not equal, but it does not follow that it is necessary that numerical inequality leads to unequal or unfair treatment.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			I don't think you understand the concept of equity. 

Anyway, is that a reasonable aspiration? Perhaps, if similar numbers of women and men want, and are suitably qualified, to be MPs. Should doctors, teachers, police etc etc all be equally 50/50?

The point about equity is that if the ratio of men and women coming forward for nomination is 1:4, then ending up with a similar ratio among selected candidates is equitable. Otherwise, you either have to construct an argument that the women nominees are on average better (however defined, XX or XY genotype excepted), and therefore are being discriminated against in the selection process, or they are much the same but it is reasonable to select less well qualified women just because they are women. 

Does the same logic extend to ethnic groups, social class, age ranges, gay vs straight, etc etc?

Personally I would be very happy to discriminate against career politicians of either gender, or Michael Gove, who have come from Oxbridge with a PPE degree, worked as a special adviser or lobbyist before being inserted into a safe seat.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly there's no reason I can see why the ratio in the Medical Profession (yours I gather) shouldn't reflect that of general society - allowing for the 'drag' of previous differences.

In fact, I believe the medical profession actually demonstrates some of the earliest documented prejudices against women. Most of the women murdered as 'witches' were merely competitors in the workplace dominated by/exclusive to men! I'd suggest that's also a major underlying reason there's still inequality in Church rules too.

My attitude is/would be 'Are they/Would they be a good MP' What their background is is much less of a consideration to me. However, if I was picking a team of MPs, such as what DC does for Cabinet, I'd want a group that, along with being able to do the job, also reflects society rather more than the current one does! But I'm happy to admit I'm not much of a political animal. So how a top political animal deals with aspiring top political animals is a matter for them!


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			Certainly there's no reason I can see why the ratio in the Medical Profession (yours I gather) shouldn't reflect that of general society - allowing for the 'drag' of previous differences.

In fact, I believe the medical profession actually demonstrates some of the earliest documented prejudices against women. Most of the women murdered as 'witches' were merely competitors in the workplace dominated by/exclusive to men! I'd suggest that's also a major underlying reason there's still inequality in Church rules too.
		
Click to expand...


Women are now in a majority in medical school. 

Within the medical profession, the term witches is now used for homeopaths and chiropractors rather than women.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 24, 2013)

Here she goes again playing the sexism card to anyone who will listen. 

Fair enough when there has clearly been discrimination against women but yet again she has jumped onto anything she can find to try and help her own agenda. Maybe if she thought why there is no womens race before she opened her daft mouth then people would take her views more seriously.

The womens tour has not been run since 2009 as stated in the article due to lack of sponsors. Why the hell is she writing a letter to the Tour de France director bleating about it? 

Surely instead of whinging on trying to pressurise the mens tour director her time would be better spent trying to obtain sponsorship for the Womens race??


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			Please. Fairness is a complicated concept, and in your case, a broader interpretation simply means you can keep arguing that things are unfair just because it seems that way to you even if you can't find specific arguments. You made the accusation but now it seems you don't have the facts to back it.

Equality and equity are often in conflict, and sometimes rightly so, so when you trot out the idea that something is unfair, you have to say what you mean. In terms of equality, the gender breakdown currently is clearly not equal, but it does not follow that it is necessary that numerical inequality leads to unequal or unfair treatment.
		
Click to expand...



Hmm.. I made the argument that there was a disproportionate split of male/female MPs in parliament and produced the figures to back that up.... it's 80/20, you'll recall. 

In response to the suggestion that the same proportion go forward to the electorate as candidates I commented that the selection process must be flawed (OK, an opinion). Not stated, but certainly intended, was that includes the reasons/manner/blockers for people choosing to go forward for selection.

It was actually yourself who suggested that it was equitable since the proportion of females selected as candidates matches those who come forward; without producing any figures to back up that hypothesis. Rather than nit-pick I was happy to concede that I didn't know whether that was true or not so pretty sad you chose to twist this one back at me. 

No point going on with this now it's descended into patronisation and he-said she-said.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			The womens tour has not been run since 2009 as stated in the article due to lack of sponsors. Why the hell is she writing a letter to the Tour de France director bleating about it?
		
Click to expand...

I very strongly suspect that if the TdF were told that they HAD to hold a womens race then it would happen.   

In life if you are facing a journey it is easy to see all the obstacles in the way and so if you don't have to get there then you might not bother starting or you give up along the way - but if you *have *to reach your destination, the chances are that you'll get there.

If the will is there it will happen.


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I very strongly suspect that if the TdF were told that they HAD to hold a womens race then it would happen.   

In life if you are facing a journey it is easy to see all the obstacles in the way and so if you don't have to get there then you might not bother starting or you give up along the way - but if you *have *to reach your destination, the chances are that you'll get there.

If the will is there it will happen.
		
Click to expand...

And who would pay for that, the French tax payer?  As it would need to be the French authorities who "force" them to do so.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			Women are now in a majority in medical school.
		
Click to expand...

Good to see. Is the ratio of graduates basically the same as that of their entrance ratios?



Ethan said:



			Within the medical profession, the term witches is now used for homeopaths and chiropractors rather than women.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Though I've seen 'homeopathic' remedies work (on animals, so no placebo required). And I'd sooner go straight to a (suitably qualified, non-'extreme') manipulative Chiropractor for many of my chronic ailments than my GP!


----------



## Ethan (Jul 24, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			Good to see. Is the ratio of graduates basically the same as that of their entrance ratios?


Though I've seen 'homeopathic' remedies work (on animals, so no placebo required). And I'd sooner go straight to a (suitably qualified, non-'extreme') manipulative Chiropractor for many of my chronic ailments than my GP!
		
Click to expand...

Placebo effect is much more than 'its all in the head' and occurs in animals and even test tubes too.

Homeopathy does not work as such - i.e. it does not evoke any pharmacological effect on humans or animals because by design it has no active pharmacological ingredient. It is great, however, for conditions that are likely to get better themselves anyway. 

No idea on the female graduation rate in medicine, may be better than the male if my class year is any indicator.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

ger147 said:



			And who would pay for that, the French tax payer?  As it would need to be the French authorities who "force" them to do so.
		
Click to expand...

Actually I don't care - if it had to be held then someone would pay for it and it would happen.  As usual a hurdle is thrown in the way that some see as stopping it dead in it's tracks rather than just accept that a way would be found.

So if the TdF themselves felt it *had* to happen then it would - they would find a way.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 24, 2013)

Ethan said:



			Homeopathy does not work as such - i.e. it does not evoke any pharmacological effect on humans or animals because by design it has no active pharmacological ingredient. It is great, however, for conditions that are likely to get better themselves anyway.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Actually, this wasn't a homeopathic remedy, it as a 'Natural'/Herbal one- Garlic Powder for Sweet Itch. I'm definitely not a believer in pure homeopathic remedies - for the reason you state!

There may/may not have been other factors involved, but the 2 years I observed, the symptoms were certainly much reduced. Owner certainly wasn't going to allow Steroids to be used! Obviously only 1 case and certainly not 'scientific'. I also saw a 'Horse Chiropractor' in action too - successfully!


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Actually I don't care - if it had to be held then someone would pay for it and it would happen.  As usual a hurdle is thrown in the way that some see as stopping it dead in it's tracks rather than just accept that a way would be found.
		
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Harriet and the 70,000 folk who signed the petition don't care either, unless of course they were asked to foot the bill themselves.


----------



## Sweep (Jul 24, 2013)

chrisd said:



			I'm not in the least bit concerned whether 1 in 5 in favour of men or women or any other variation, I just want the best person available for the job! 

Positive discrimination is still discrimination to me
		
Click to expand...

Excellent post


----------



## Sweep (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Of course not, but imagine the next parliament only had 20% men; you wouldn't be happy!
		
Click to expand...

I would be perfectly happy, if the seats were filled with the best people for the job.
Why is it always assumed that anyone who is against this back door feminism is seen as anti equality? I, for one, am not and I take offence at the assumption that the opposite is true. Mrs. harman's policies in the main are anti equality, opportunistic and absolutely disingenuous. If you fall for this then more fool you.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I very strongly suspect that if the TdF were told that they HAD to hold a womens race then it would happen.   

In life if you are facing a journey it is easy to see all the obstacles in the way and so if you don't have to get there then you might not bother starting or you give up along the way - but if you *have *to reach your destination, the chances are that you'll get there.

If the will is there it will happen.
		
Click to expand...

You cant make somebody who is in essence running a business open another branch just because somebody feels it will make it equal yet its not financially viable for it to happen.

If she gives that much of crap why doesn't she start up a womans tour? Or why hasn't a woman done it if they feel so outraged??  Instead of trying to force a man to do it for her? 

Shes not really arsed about cycling just her own agenda thats why.


----------



## Paul_Stewart (Jul 24, 2013)

The real reason we don't have as many women MPs is because they are all still at the petrol station doing their shopping and adjusting their mirrors instead of driving off .....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			You cant make somebody who is in essence running a business open another branch just because somebody feels it will make it equal yet its not financially viable for it to happen
		
Click to expand...

Well actually you can.  And if the business can't financially manage to do it then it goes out of business.  I know of businesses that fold because they can't afford to bring their premises up to scratch to meet Fire Regs.  That doesn't mean you don't require them to meet the Fire Regs.

The TdF would not go bust.  If they really want to hold a women's race they could.  Cost etc is a smokescreen - a diversionary tactic.  The teams, sponsors and broadcasters would plough money into the TdF if there was a risk of it going bust.  All it requires is for the TdF to decide that actually they *should* have a women's race - and they'll make it happen.

And HH doesn't have to be ar**d about cycling - but if she is ar**d about women's rights then she will promote the cause of those women who *do* care about a women's TdF - and there seems to be lots of them.  Why does she actually have to care about the event for her to support the cause?  She doesn't - it's the principle she's advocating - and if that is her agenda - then good - more strength to her elbow.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 24, 2013)

Uuum.... I did have something to say yesterday before I went off to work... Looks like all salient points [and more] have been covered...

Just wish though that MP's would stick with the job in hand rather than 'issue' sound bites on 'stuff' of which they have no control...


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well actually you can.  And if the business can't financially manage to do it then it goes out of business.  I know of businesses that fold because they can't afford to bring their premises up to scratch to meet Fire Regs.  That doesn't mean you don't require them to meet the Fire Regs.

The TdF would not go bust.  If they really want to hold a women's race they could.  Cost etc is a smokescreen - a diversionary tactic.  The teams, sponsors and broadcasters would plough money into the TdF if there was a risk of it going bust.  All it requires is for the TdF to decide that actually they *should* have a women's race - and they'll make it happen.

And HH doesn't have to be ar**d about cycling - but if she is ar**d about women's rights then she will promote the cause of those women who *do* care about a women's TdF - and there seems to be lots of them.  Why does she actually have to care about the event for her to support the cause?  She doesn't - it's the principle she's advocating - and if that is her agenda - then good - more strength to her elbow.
		
Click to expand...

Since when does ANYONE, male or female, have a RIGHT to a Tour de France?

What a load of absolute nonsense.  The Tour de France is not a right.

Having the vote is a right, free medical care is a right, education is a right, the Tour de France?  Behave yourself!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

MegaSteve said:



			Just wish though that MP's would stick with the job in hand rather than 'issue' sound bites on 'stuff' of which they have no control...
		
Click to expand...

Which would mean that mosty MPs needn't open their mouths in a Commons debate.  

The job of an MP includes speaking up on behalf of those who do not have a voice and to an audience such as that available to an MP; to influence those who *can* bring about change - on behalf of a consituency.  And that constituency can be their own or as in this case that constituency wanting a women's TdF reinstated.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

ger147 said:



			Since when does ANYONE, male or female, have a RIGHT to a Tour de France?

What a load of absolute nonsense.  The Tour de France is not a right.

Having the vote is a right, free medical care is a right, education is a right, the Tour de France?  Behave yourself!!
		
Click to expand...

Having a vote never used to be a right - it took a long time for the ordinary man to have a vote - and longer for the women of the UK - ordinary or otherwise.

In truth though - the bottom line is that if women want a TdF race why don't they just go and try and arrange one - albeit that that would be a lot harder than riding piggy back on the main Tour.  Is anyone stopping them?  If the French national or local government turned round and said NO - then you might have a case for claiming discrimination.


----------



## ger147 (Jul 24, 2013)

I have no issue with a women's Tour de France at all, as you say let them go ahead and organise one if they can.  It would be even better if they could have a Men's and Women's TdF running side by side but that is impossible due to current ICF regulations.

But I do have an issue with Harriet telling the organisers of the existing Tour de France that they should be organising one for women that has proven to be financially not viable over the past 20 years or so, to the point where any attempt to put one on was abandoned a few years ago.  Especially as she stood by and watched 3 planned UK stages of the 2009 women's race fall through due to lack of funds and didn't step in to help when she was in a position to do so at the time.

Hypocrisy of the highest order and nowt to do with equality or women's rights IMHO from the lady in question.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well actually you can.  And if the business can't financially manage to do it then it goes out of business.  I know of businesses that fold because they can't afford to bring their premises up to scratch to meet Fire Regs.  That doesn't mean you don't require them to meet the Fire Regs.

The TdF would not go bust.  If they really want to hold a women's race they could.  Cost etc is a smokescreen - a diversionary tactic.  The teams, sponsors and broadcasters would plough money into the TdF if there was a risk of it going bust.  All it requires is for the TdF to decide that actually they *should* have a women's race - and they'll make it happen.

And HH doesn't have to be ar**d about cycling - but if she is ar**d about women's rights then she will promote the cause of those women who *do* care about a women's TdF - and there seems to be lots of them.  Why does she actually have to care about the event for her to support the cause?  She doesn't - it's the principle she's advocating - and if that is her agenda - then good - more strength to her elbow.
		
Click to expand...

Is this a wind up? Fire regs is a different thing altogether and you know it, thats required for safety. Making a company sell something they dont already sell is totally different. Just like nobody can force muirfield to admit lady members nobody can force the tour de france to put a new race on for ladies.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 24, 2013)

Oooh I'm looking forwards to the next election and the debates that will rage on this forum.  Well I say looking forwards to, more, I am dreading it and will probably put my fist through my screen in anger and then weary resignation....


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which would mean that mosty MPs needn't open their mouths in a Commons debate.  

The job of an MP includes speaking up on behalf of those who do not have a voice and to an audience such as that available to an MP; to influence those who *can* bring about change - on behalf of a consituency.  And that constituency can be their own or as in this case that constituency wanting a women's TdF reinstated.
		
Click to expand...


The 'job in hand' for me is seeing that there is sufficient 'affordable' homes, you can get to see a GP in 24hrs, that our streets are safe and 'our' services are properly funded... Once they've completed these 'simple' tasks then they can turn their attention to secondary quests like getting a TdF for girls....


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 24, 2013)

MegaSteve said:



			The 'job in hand' for me is seeing that there is sufficient 'affordable' homes, you can get to see a GP in 24hrs, that our streets are safe and 'our' services are properly funded...
		
Click to expand...

I suspect you've got a long wait then. So I'd suggest not getting too angry that none of these has happened as you will end up being a very angry young man.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 24, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Oooh I'm looking forwards to the next election and the debates that will rage on this forum.  Well I say looking forwards to, more, I am dreading it and will probably put my fist through my screen in anger and then weary resignation....
		
Click to expand...

Followed by you trotting out the Daily mail line again. Yeah we get it.

YAWN.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 24, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			I suspect you've got a long wait then. So I'd suggest not getting too angry that none of these has happened as you will end up being a very angry young man.
		
Click to expand...


HK  Nothing I'd like better than to be an angry young man again ...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			Is this a wind up? Fire regs is a different thing altogether and you know it, thats required for safety. Making a company sell something they dont already sell is totally different. Just like nobody can force muirfield to admit lady members nobody can force the tour de france to put a new race on for ladies.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that you CAN demand the TdF stages a woman's race - I'm saying that - like a business having to upgrade their premises to meet Fire Regs - if they had to, a way would be found. The fact that they don't and don't have to, is IMO simply a lack of will to do so.  And maybe HH is suggesting that the TdF should make a bit more effort to stage one.  By cancelling it they have indicated that a women's race is less important (which in the historical scheme of things it certainly is) - but nevertheless to many women it IS important - and may be more so in the future - if it existed.

That's all.

And you think that by raising this issue HH is ignoring or distracted from her responsibilities on the 'important' stuff you mention.  I don't really think one statement makes that much difference on her work on these otehr issues - but it's an easy thing to suggest of an MP you may not luck - wasting time on frivolous stuff that doesn't affect you.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 24, 2013)

FairwayDodger said:



			Of course not, but imagine the next parliament only had 20% men; you wouldn't be happy!
		
Click to expand...

Fairway Dodger, I listed on here in another thread a number of things about great Britain that I felt needed attention and that MP's of either sex generally failed to address, NHS tourism, corporate tax dodges and illegal immigration to name but three.  If having only 20% men in the parliament meant these and others got addressed then you're right, I wouldn't be happy; I'd be absolutely delighted.  I'd be that delighted that I would actually campaign for it if that is what would happen. But I think hell will freeze over before an increased proportion of female MP's will make any difference to what is actually achieved in parliament.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 24, 2013)

MegaSteve said:



			The 'job in hand' for me is seeing that there is sufficient 'affordable' homes, you can get to see a GP in 24hrs, that our streets are safe and 'our' services are properly funded... Once they've completed these 'simple' tasks then they can turn their attention to secondary quests like getting a TdF for girls....
		
Click to expand...

Exactly.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not saying that you CAN demand the TdF stages a woman's race - I'm saying that - like a business having to upgrade their premises to meet Fire Regs - if they had to, a way would be found. The fact that they don't and don't have to, is IMO simply a lack of will to do so.  And maybe HH is suggesting that the TdF should make a bit more effort to stage one.  By cancelling it they have indicated that a women's race is less important (which in the historical scheme of things it certainly is) - but nevertheless to many women it IS important - and may be more so in the future - if it existed.

That's all.
		
Click to expand...

I dont agree that anybody ever could force something like that so we will just have to disagree on that one.

Ok then lets look at this from a slightly different angle.

A company has a very succesful product and rolls out another version which doesnt do as well so they stop making it etc. Why would or should they want to bring this product back despite it being a failure?? If this product was any good there is no way they would take this product out of production.

There has already been a ladies race which wasnt very successful by all accounts so maybe the focus should be on why it failed in the first place rather than just crying wolf and calling for it to come back? 

Thats before it even gets onto Harman peddling this crap just to suit her agenda.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Blue in Munich said:



			Fairway Dodger, I listed on here in another thread a number of things about great Britain that I felt needed attention and that MP's of either sex generally failed to address, NHS tourism, corporate tax dodges and illegal immigration to name but three.  If having only 20% men in the parliament meant these and others got addressed then you're right, I wouldn't be happy; I'd be absolutely delighted.  I'd be that delighted that I would actually campaign for it if that is what would happen. But I think hell will freeze over before an increased proportion of female MP's will make any difference to what is actually achieved in parliament.
		
Click to expand...

NHS Tourism - tick, tick tick in that box from me.  Stories my Mrs tells me...

And there is also the abuse of the NHS by UK citizens.  Using private medical insurance to get a bit of preferential treatmen,t then when it comes to paying saying that they would expect the NHS to pick up the bill - and if the NHS says no then the NHS has the expense of chasing the patient for payment.  And as that often costs more than what has to be paid the NHS has to let the patient away with it - fraud really.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			I dont agree that anybody ever could force something like that so we will just have to disagree on that one.

Ok then lets look at this from a slightly different angle.

A company has a very succesful product and rolls out another version which doesnt do as well so they stop making it etc. Why would or should they want to bring this product back despite it being a failure?? If this product was any good there is no way they would take this product out of production.

There has already been a ladies race which wasnt very successful by all accounts so maybe the focus should be on why it failed in the first place rather than just crying wolf and calling for it to come back? 

Thats before it even gets onto Harman peddling this crap just to suit her agenda.
		
Click to expand...

Whoa - I'm not saying anyone can *force *a business such as the TdF to stage a women's race - but IF the TdF had to stage a race they would find a way.  So without *having* to, I am sure that they could still find a way.  The fact that they don't suggests to me thatthey don't think it that important or worthwhile - and that's why there's a petition - and that's why HH has given voice to that petition - the petition you call crap.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			A company has a very succesful product and rolls out another version which doesnt do as well so they stop making it etc. Why would or should they want to bring this product back despite it being a failure?? If this product was any good there is no way they would take this product out of production
		
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a greenkeeping meeting I had once when a young greenkeeper made a suggestion.
I quickly responded by saying we tried that 5 years ago and it did not work.
He came back saying 'is there any reason why it would not work now, times have changed'
The team thought about it, and we did it, and it worked.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 24, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Reminds me of a greenkeeping meeting I had once when a young greenkeeper made a suggestion.
I quickly responded by saying we tried that 5 years ago and it did not work.
He came back saying 'is there any reason why it would not work now, times have changed'
The team thought about it, and we did it, and it worked.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed - maybe a women's TdF race would be very successful next year given the fantastic success of British cycling in the last two Olympics and last two TdFs.

Tour of Britain goes past the end of my road i September - I'll be there watching it ghp past.  Never imagined I'd ever be interested enough in cycling to do that sort of thing.


----------



## Sweep (Jul 24, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Indeed - maybe a women's TdF race would be very successful next year given the fantastic success of British cycling in the last two Olympics and last two TdFs.

Tour of Britain goes past the end of my road i September - I'll be there watching it ghp past.  Never imagined I'd ever be interested enough in cycling to do that sort of thing.
		
Click to expand...

It's a French race...oh I can't be bothered


----------



## Sweep (Jul 24, 2013)

Birchy said:



			Followed by you trotting out the Daily mail line again. Yeah we get it.

YAWN.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 25, 2013)

You can't have a Women's TDF if no one wants to organise it.   The question then is one of 'Why'?   Either there is not enough interest, there are no sponsors, there are not enough Women who want to do it, if there was one then it would not be as good as the Men's race.    Who knows?    No manner of comments by HH will change anything, only a campaign to gather the facts and if they turn out favourable it needs someone with the get up and go to do something about it.   Now would HH be that person?   I doubt it.


----------



## Paul_Stewart (Jul 25, 2013)

It's like when someone from the England women's football team started bleating on about how little they get paid compared to the Premier League players.  That has nothing to do with equality, it's because no-one wants to watch you play.   Same with the England women's cricket team who had someone on Test match special whingeing about the same thing.   But have no fear girls, Harriet Harperson will soon be along on her soapbox to complain about that too.


----------



## chrisd (Jul 25, 2013)

Paul_Stewart said:



			It's like when someone from the England women's football team started bleating on about how little they get paid compared to the Premier League players.  That has nothing to do with equality, it's because no-one wants to watch you play.   Same with the England women's cricket team who had someone on Test match special whingeing about the same thing.   But have no fear girls, Harriet Harperson will soon be along on her soapbox to complain about that too.
		
Click to expand...

.............. And I'm sure that we all watch ladies rugby? Boxing?


----------



## USER1999 (Jul 25, 2013)

I think the last two winners, may be the last three, of the ladies tdf were British. If sponsorship couldn't be raised to hold a stage in england when we were winning it, what's changed now?

If there was a commercial plan that worked, and would make money, they would be running one. There isn't, and it won't. 

HH is never going to force the French to run a race, in their own country. If she thinks she can, she's lost it.

Our MPs should worry about running our country, not worry about private enterprises in others.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 25, 2013)

murphthemog said:



			I think the last two winners, may be the last three, of the ladies tdf were British. If sponsorship couldn't be raised to hold a stage in england when we were winning it, what's changed now?

If there was a commercial plan that worked, and would make money, they would be running one. There isn't, and it won't. 

HH is never going to force the French to run a race, in their own country. If she thinks she can, she's lost it.

Our MPs should worry about running our country, not worry about private enterprises in others.
		
Click to expand...


HH doesn't give a monkeys about whether there is a women's TDF. She only wanted to make a point that she is the champion of women, i.e. 50% or more of voters.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

Ethan said:



			She only wanted to make a point that she is the champion of women, i.e. 50% or more of voters.
		
Click to expand...

And what on earth is wrong with being a champion of women's causes.  I guess for you it's the fact that she does it out of self-interest.  Well if her efforts are of benefit to women's causes then she deserves benefit to her personally.  How often do you do something for others that is of absolutely no benefit to yourself - even if it's an 'that Ethan did this for me - he's a good guy'.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 25, 2013)

Ethan said:



			HH doesn't give a monkeys about whether there is a women's TDF. She only wanted to make a point that she is the champion of women, i.e. 50% or more of voters.
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear that won't do will it, a woman actually standing up for women's rights.
JEEEEEEEEEEZ some folk want to start living in the 20th centuary far less the 21st.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh dear that won't do will it, a woman actually standing up for women's rights.
JEEEEEEEEEEZ some folk want to start living in the 20th centuary far less the 21st.
		
Click to expand...

^^^Absolutely with you on this.  Seems like a politician can't do ANYTHING these days without being accused of doing it solely for self-interest.  As you say - JEEEEEEEEEEZ.


----------



## Ethan (Jul 25, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh dear that won't do will it, a woman actually standing up for women's rights.
JEEEEEEEEEEZ some folk want to start living in the 20th centuary far less the 21st.
		
Click to expand...

Catch a grip. If you think HH is doing this for any reason other than self promotion, then you are very naive and have little understanding of 21st C politics. The only woman HH wants to advance is herself.

In any case, having a womens TDF is nothing to do with womens rights. If women wanted a womens TDF, there would be one. 

Likewise for womens football and golf. Women watch more of the mens game than womens.


----------



## User20205 (Jul 25, 2013)

Ethan said:



			Catch a grip. If you think HH is doing this for any reason other than self promotion, then you are very naive and have little understanding of 21st C politics. The only woman HH wants to advance is herself.

In any case, having a womens TDF is nothing to do with womens rights. If women wanted a womens TDF, there would be one. 

Likewise for womens football and golf. Women watch more of the mens game than womens.
		
Click to expand...

agreed, it can be nothing but self promotion if she passes comment on something she has no jurisdiction over


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

Ethan said:



			Catch a grip. If you think HH is doing this for any reason other than self promotion, then you are very naive and have little understanding of 21st C politics. The only woman HH wants to advance is herself.

In any case, having a womens TDF is nothing to do with womens rights. If women wanted a womens TDF, there would be one. 

Likewise for womens football and golf. Women watch more of the mens game than womens.
		
Click to expand...

But it doesn't matter!!

If she is promoting women's causes and giving them a voice (as she is) then I don't really care whether or not she is 'actually' doing it for herself.  The cause and voice is heard - and THAT's what matter surely.  

If you took that attitude then you would damn an MP for saying anything about anything as you'd accuse them of doing it for self-interest - as you seem to believe that HH (and it seems almost every MP) is solely driven by self-interest and that nothing else matters to her.  I would rather be somewhat naive than as cynical as you.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

therod said:



			agreed, it can be nothing but self promotion if she passes comment on something she has no jurisdiction over
		
Click to expand...

But an individual MP has no jurisdiction over ANYTHING??


----------



## Snelly (Jul 25, 2013)

What a fascinating thread.  Reminds me of my youth when I used to think that the Guardian had sensible editorials. 

My view is that from a spectator perspective, women's sport is pretty dull.   Same for disabled sport.    Highly unpopular views I am sure.  But clearly a view quietly shared by many as they are not well attended, well sponsored or given a high profile, despite the best efforts of the bodies concerned.  Harsh as it sounds, they just aren't that watchable.   Jessica Ennis getting gold is probably the exception that proves the rule.

And to be clear, I am not denigrating the efforts and achievements of the participants.  I love all sport and everyone should play as much as they can.  I am just saying that as professional, commercially viable entities, they struggle somewhat when compared to the blokes events.  

And lastly, didn't this argument get done recently on the forum? 


Harriet Harperson?  A total waste of space...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

Snelly said:



			Harriet Harperson?  A total waste of space...
		
Click to expand...

Not if she is giving voice to the point of view of a consituency with a grievance.  What is she doing wrong?

Seems to be that for many, if a subject or concern is of no interest or doesn't affect them directly, then it doesn't matter and talking about it is a waste of time and self-indulgent.


----------



## Birchy (Jul 25, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not if she is giving voice to the point of view of a consituency with a grievance.  What is she doing wrong?

Seems to be that for many, if a subject or concern is of no interest or doesn't affect them directly, then it doesn't matter and talking about it is a waste of time and self-indulgent.
		
Click to expand...

The trouble is I bet theres a thousand more important issues than the womans tour de France that she could pipe up about but she has chose to pipe up about this because it suits her "Women are always discriminated against agenda".

Never mind the fact that barely anybody give a crap about watching a womans tour de France as previously proved when it was pulled. Women have a right to a tour de france if they want one, nobody is stopping them are they?


----------



## Ethan (Jul 25, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But it doesn't matter!!

If she is promoting women's causes and giving them a voice (as she is) then I don't really care whether or not she is 'actually' doing it for herself.  The cause and voice is heard - and THAT's what matter surely.  

If you took that attitude then you would damn an MP for saying anything about anything as you'd accuse them of doing it for self-interest - as you seem to believe that HH (and it seems almost every MP) is solely driven by self-interest and that nothing else matters to her.  I would rather be somewhat naive than as cynical as you.
		
Click to expand...

It does matter if her self promotion deludes people into thinking that she gives a toss or would be a suitable leader of Labour once they stab Ed in the back. 

The TDF is not a rights issue. If there is adequate commercial interest in having a race composed entirely of left handed ginger haired bespectacled lesbians, then one will be set up. 

Harman is not stupid. She knows full well that this is a free shot at some publicity with no risk to her or Labour, and one she can revive next year when the TDF is in the UK, and an election is looming. It is utterly cynical, but not because she is a woman and it is a 'woman's rights issue', but because she is a politician and they should all be assumed to be self serving liars and crooks until proven otherwise. It also doesn't hurt that it is a poke at the French. 

Cynicism has served me well in my dealings with local and national politicians of both genders and all major parties. I also know some Westminster insiders. The politicians and advisers are just as cynical, by the way. I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

Ethan said:



			It does matter if her self promotion deludes people into thinking that she gives a toss or would be a suitable leader of Labour once they stab Ed in the back. 

The TDF is not a rights issue. If there is adequate commercial interest in having a race composed entirely of left handed ginger haired bespectacled lesbians, then one will be set up. 

Harman is not stupid. She knows full well that this is a free shot at some publicity with no risk to her or Labour, and one she can revive next year when the TDF is in the UK, and an election is looming. It is utterly cynical, but not because she is a woman and it is a 'woman's rights issue', but because she is a politician and they should all be assumed to be self serving liars and crooks until proven otherwise. It also doesn't hurt that it is a poke at the French. 

Cynicism has served me well in my dealings with local and national politicians of both genders and all major parties. I also know some Westminster insiders. The politicians and advisers are just as cynical, by the way. I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them.
		
Click to expand...

Well it seems like you are offering your services to go run the country and voice the legitimate concerns of others.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 25, 2013)

Harriet Harman is a product of the Liberal Elette, someone who has lived a privileged life and has needed for nothing, never been hard up or had to hold down a real job yet seems to think she knows better than us how we should live our lives.   She is not alone and this trait is to be found across the political spectrum.  It is a particular trait with socialists and liberals though, they always think they are better equipped than us to spend our money and social engineer our society.

This Women's TDF issue is  a smoke screen to get herself into the headlines, it's a 'non' issue and laughable that a politician needs to spend any of her valuable time on.  If she really wants to crusade Women's rights then she would do better by helping them to understand that bringing up a family is a fantastic thing for them to do and of the greatest benefit to the welfare of their offspring.   We dont need champions bleating on about paying more tax credits, family allowances and child care.  We need Politicians that stop squeezing the pips out of working people and let them keep their wages so they can spend it themselves on what they want to without paying for the Scribes and Scribes of the Scribes (even unto the seventh generation) of the Public sector to administer.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 25, 2013)

You really think HH *needs* to get herself into the headlines?  Anyway the rest of your post suggests you're not that sympathetic to the views of HH or any of her colleagues, so she's never going to do or say anything that you will admit to agreeing with.  And I'll note if it was a smokescreen then you wouldn't know who was raising the question - that 70,000 have signed a petition about.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 25, 2013)

Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Judean People's Front
9) Lib Dems


----------



## User20205 (Jul 25, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Lib Dems
		
Click to expand...

where would you put yourself on there?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 25, 2013)

therod said:



			where would you put yourself on there?
		
Click to expand...

I'm traditionally BNP, but I think they are becoming a bit soft on immigration, so next time I think I will go National Front.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 25, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Judean People's Front
9) Lib Dems
		
Click to expand...

Missed out mine.   The Gengis Khan revival movement.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 25, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You really think HH *needs* to get herself into the headlines?  Anyway the rest of your post suggests you're not that sympathetic to the views of HH or any of her colleagues, so she's never going to do or say anything that you will admit to agreeing with.  And I'll note if it was a smokescreen then you wouldn't know who was raising the question - that 70,000 have signed a petition about.
		
Click to expand...

Headlines! Yes, I do think thats what *she needs.*   Her type get off on it, its the opium of the loony left.

70K, a mere bagatelle of yogurt knitters with too much time on their hands.


----------



## User20205 (Jul 25, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'm traditionally BNP, but I think they are becoming a bit soft on immigration, so next time I think I will go National Front.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 25, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Judean People's Front
9) Lib Dems
		
Click to expand...


I shall be kind to you and assume that the poll was held at a 'marketing day' somewhere near GM Towers.


----------



## Sweep (Jul 25, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Judean People's Front
9) Lib Dems
		
Click to expand...

You missed out the Daily Mail Alliance


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 26, 2013)

Sweep said:



			You missed out the Daily Mail Alliance
		
Click to expand...

And the GM Scottish Front.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 26, 2013)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I shall be kind to you and assume that the poll was held at a 'marketing day' somewhere near GM Towers.
		
Click to expand...

I did actually have the SNP in there at one stage.  But I thought there's no way I could include it without offending someone and starting the English/Scottish thing off.  Yet again. So I took it out. So yes, consider it an English biased list. But feel free to do a Scottish one.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 26, 2013)

Sweep said:



			You missed out the Daily Mail Alliance
		
Click to expand...

UKIP is the political wing of The Daily Mail.


----------



## USER1999 (Jul 26, 2013)

The men's tdf is the one of the most watched spectator sport in the world.

70k wanting a women's race is next to no one. Heck, there are 60 odd million people in the uk, of whom roughly half must be female, and they aren't interested, clearly.


----------



## Sweep (Jul 26, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			UKIP is the political wing of The Daily Mail.
		
Click to expand...

I _knew_ I could get you to mention the Daily Mail again


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 26, 2013)

SocketRocket said:



			Headlines! Yes, I do think thats what *she needs.*   Her type get off on it, its the opium of the loony left
		
Click to expand...

So what?  Your a golfer and your type get off nailing a drive down the middle or draining a long tricky putt.  Doesn't harm anyone and it keeps you coming back - th eopium of the golfer.  

Besides I though we were a little bit more grown up these days than casually and carelessly referring to the 'loony left' just because the likes of the DM perpetuate it for their own purposes - whether it is real or not.  Also I think it is inappropriate to imply that a wish or cause supported by a petition of 70,000 and voiced by a left of centre politician is therefore 'loony'.


----------



## Paul_Stewart (Jul 26, 2013)

When it Harriet Harperson going to do something the appalling lack of male midwives?   It is less than 1% of the total.  I look forward to hearing her champion that cause next.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 26, 2013)

Paul_Stewart said:



			When it Harriet Harperson going to do something the appalling lack of male midwives?   It is less than 1% of the total.  I look forward to hearing her champion that cause next.
		
Click to expand...

Is there a great demand from blokes to become midwives that is being blocked for some reason - no? - then she need do nothing until there is.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 26, 2013)

Hacker Khan said:



			Results are just in from the latest poll on the voting intentions of the contributors to the GM forum at the next election. And they are as follows in order of preference:-

1) UKIP
2) Conservative Party
3) BNP
4) National Front
5) Labour
6) Monster Raving Loony
7) The People's Front of Judea
8) Judean People's Front
9) Lib Dems
		
Click to expand...


In truth, if the elected parties did at least 50% of what they promised, then there wouldn't be any need for 'extreme' 'Daily Mail' politics ...


----------



## Hacker Khan (Jul 26, 2013)

MegaSteve said:



			In truth, if the elected parties did at least 50% of what they promised, then there wouldn't be any need for 'extreme' 'Daily Mail' politics ...
		
Click to expand...

Actually it's not really the politics of the Daily Mail that I hate, I do not agree with most of it but hey, I read The Times so I am no stranger to a right wing view.  But the fact it's a hateful spiteful little paper blaming anyone apart from white middle class people for most of the ills in this world.  

Plus the misogyny of the web site that seems to take the Heat magazine school of journalism as it's bench mark, and print story after story, each including several pictures, of women in their bikinis or tight dresses as 'news' when it's patently obvious they are just doing it so old men can leer at young women in bikinis. Go on, have a look now and no mater what time it is I can guarantee you that a lot of the stories will be about mostly female D list 'celebrities' who have done nothing more than gone to the shops, gone for a meal or gone to the beach.  

So slightly racist, spiteful and sexist, not a great combination.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 26, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Is there a great demand from blokes to become midwives that is being blocked for some reason - no? - then she need do nothing until there is.
		
Click to expand...

There probably wasn't a great swathe of women golfers wanting to join Muirfield, but she saw fit to stick her nose in there.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 26, 2013)

Blue in Munich said:



			There probably wasn't a great swathe of women golfers wanting to join Muirfield, but she saw fit to stick her nose in there.
		
Click to expand...

Though there were plenty of folk expressing their view that women members should be allowed.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 26, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Though there were plenty of folk expressing their view that women members should be allowed.
		
Click to expand...

Plenty of people; her, Salmond & who else?  Whilst she said nothing about all female clubs that by definition disbar male members.  

If she wants to campaign against single gender clubs for either sex then fine, but to go on about banning only half the single sex clubs in the name of equality is about as hypocritical as it gets, which in the case of a politician is really saying something.

Try reading her Wikipedia page, there's some real gems in there.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 26, 2013)

Blue in Munich said:



			Plenty of people; her, Salmond & who else?  Whilst she said nothing about all female clubs that by definition disbar male members.  

If she wants to campaign against single gender clubs for either sex then fine, but to go on about banning only half the single sex clubs in the name of equality is about as hypocritical as it gets, which in the case of a politician is really saying something.

Try reading her Wikipedia page, there's some real gems in there.
		
Click to expand...

So the concern was purely a media and political confection and none of the public, golf commentators, watchers or golfers like us are in the slightest bit bothered that Muirfield doesn't have lady members.  Didn't get that impression myself.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 26, 2013)

Blue in Munich said:



			Plenty of people; her, Salmond & who else?  Whilst she said nothing about all female clubs that by definition disbar male members.  

If she wants to campaign against single gender clubs for either sex then fine, but to go on about banning only half the single sex clubs in the name of equality is about as hypocritical as it gets, which in the case of a politician is really saying something.

Try reading her Wikipedia page, there's some real gems in there.
		
Click to expand...

She really is a piece of work eh?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 26, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*So what?  Your a golfer and your type get off nailing a drive down the middle or draining a long tricky putt.  Doesn't harm anyone and it keeps you coming back - th eopium of the golfer.  *

Besides I though we were a little bit more grown up these days than casually and carelessly referring to the 'loony left' just because the likes of the DM perpetuate it for their own purposes - whether it is real or not.  Also I think it is inappropriate to imply that a wish or cause supported by a petition of 70,000 and voiced by a left of centre politician is therefore 'loony'.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, I do like doing that but at least I am honest in admitting it.

I dont need the DM to form my opinions, theirs are quite mild against mine 

I would agree that there are many more than 70K 'looney lefties' available for pointless petitions.  Just look to the teachers Unions, Police federation, NHS, or anywhere that the tax payers money is pouring into the black hole of public waste.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 26, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So the concern was purely a media and political confection and none of the public, golf commentators, watchers or golfers like us are in the slightest bit bothered that Muirfield doesn't have lady members.  Didn't get that impression myself.
		
Click to expand...

My recollection is, based on the thread that was running at the time, the majority of forumers recognised the right of a members club to determine who it wished to admit as members.


----------



## Sweep (Jul 27, 2013)

stevie_r said:



			My recollection is, based on the thread that was running at the time, the majority of forumers recognised the right of a members club to determine who it wished to admit as members.
		
Click to expand...

As did Mrs. harperson when she presented her Equalities Act, just 2 years ago. Now though, she seems to have a problem with single sex members clubs. Well, those with an exclusively male membership that is.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 27, 2013)

Given her repeated lack of concern for the safety of other road users, I propose a national 'Harman is behind the wheel' alert system.  They could put out on that TP thing that always kicks in and overrides the best bit of your favourite driving track on your cd.


----------



## Iaing (Jul 27, 2013)

Sweep said:



			As did Mrs. harperson when she presented her Equalities Act, just 2 years ago. Now though, she seems to have a problem with single sex members clubs. Well, those with an exclusively male membership that is.
		
Click to expand...

That'll be because she's a hypocrite.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 27, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So the concern was purely a media and political confection and none of the public, golf commentators, watchers or golfers like us are in the slightest bit bothered that Muirfield doesn't have lady members.  Didn't get that impression myself.
		
Click to expand...

You've pretty much summed it up there, politician looking for cheap publicity, media looking for an easy headline and most people really not that bothered one way or the other.  The impression I got was that a lot of forum members, indeed people in general, would rather that she addressed what were perceived as the country's real problems than stick her oar in here.  Still, I suppose it is a slightly more worthy cause than trying to get MP's expenses removed from the scope of the Freedom of Information Act.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 27, 2013)

Blue in Munich said:



			You've pretty much summed it up there, politician looking for cheap publicity, media looking for an easy headline and most people really not that bothered one way or the other.  The impression I got was that a lot of forum members, indeed people in general, would rather that she addressed what were perceived as the country's real problems than stick her oar in here.  Still, I suppose it is a slightly more worthy cause than trying to get MP's expenses removed from the scope of the Freedom of Information Act.
		
Click to expand...

Except the 70k who signed the petition.  And do you really think that HH spendng a little time on this issue significantly detracts from her working on those other important issues the country is facing - of course it doesn't - those it is easy to pretend that it does.  Anyway.  We disagree.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jul 27, 2013)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except the 70k who signed the petition.  And do you really think that HH spendng a little time on this issue significantly detracts from her working on those other important issues the country is facing - of course it doesn't - those it is easy to pretend that it does.  Anyway.  We disagree.
		
Click to expand...

According to the BBC report, 70,000 people signed a petition about a female TdF.  My comments have related to the Muirfield issue, about which I am not aware of any petition, just the soundbites of Harperson, Alex Salmond & Maria Miller.

If she is spending so much time dealing with the more pressing issues that bother me, and according to the press a significant proportion of the population, then surely she would gain fantastic media coverage for so doing?  And yet she doesn't.  Which leads me to the conclusion that she works on her agendas, and not necessarily what needs addressing in this country.  But as you say, we agree to disagree.


----------



## stevie_r (Jul 27, 2013)

70,000 signatures is nothing, especially when you consider that a significant number probably have no interest in watching a womens' TdF anyway but were signing merely to support a principle.

The equivalent event died through a lack of sponsorship, if big money sponsors were making a noise that they want the event then it would happen, they aren't.

TV coverage would be minimal, probably on channel 5 at 3 in the morning on Thursdays.  Sky wouldn't touch it for the simple fact that the viewing figures would make companies reticent to purchase advertising time during coverage.


----------



## stevelev (Jul 27, 2013)

stevie_r said:



			70,000 signatures is nothing, especially when you consider that a significant number probably have no interest in watching a womens' TdF anyway but were signing merely to support a principle.

The equivalent event died through a lack of sponsorship, if big money sponsors were making a noise that they want the event then it would happen, they aren't.

TV coverage would be minimal, probably on channel 5 at 3 in the morning on Thursdays.  Sky wouldn't touch it for the simple fact that the viewing figures would make companies reticent to purchase advertising time during coverage.
		
Click to expand...

Bit daft to say it would be on at 3 in the morning, especially as the 1st event if it happened would be screened live. How often do they ride in the dark on the TDF.


----------

