The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[Captain...]

12 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Gender identity is though - which is all but saying it is. 

 

Look at this article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10931423/Ofsted-cites-lack-gender-identity-teaching-primaries-factor-inspection-reports.html

 

"A DfE spokesman added: 'All pupils should receive teaching on LGBT content during their school years and schools should ensure that content is incorporated into the wider curriculum in an age-appropriate manner."

 

LGBT - T for transsexuality. Therefore surely it is taught? 

 

I totally agree about being taught to accept one another, but when I was at school (I only left 4 years ago, so not that long ago) we were taught this in ways that didn't involve all of this. I just don't see why it's necessary to know these things whilst you're a child as it's such a complex subject to understand. 

I expect, but I don't know, it is a simplified approach and it is important to discuss and normalise it because lots of children of all ages will experience it as a direct or indirect part of their lives. Whether it is a trans parent or a gay uncle or a bisexual friend of the family. It is better to address it at a young age so that if it does impact their lives they are able to process and understand it. I'm pretty sure they don't go into the mechanics of same sex intercourse or detail the process of a sex change operation. It is going to be more along the line of Johnny has 2 Mummies and Debbie has 2 Dads, little Timmy only has one parent and they identify as they/then while Skye's parents are a thruple and all of that is ok. Whereas Kevin's Dad is a Forest fan and for that he should have his head flushed down the toilet 

Edited 4 August 2022 by Captain...

[bovril]

9 minutes ago, Dames said:

There is a reason Boris is confident about a No.10 comeback. The forecast for the next 2 years does not look good. 

A little bit Henry VI, clearly unfit to rule but with a loyal following who put him back on the throne. Easily manipulated by his ambitious wife. Henry VI was deeply pious and afraid of women though so I guess the comparison ends there.

 

Wars of the Roses totally exhausted the country and wiped out much of its ruling elite. I imagine a similar thing will happen to the Conservative Party.

Edited 4 August 2022 by bovril

[Lionator]

17 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Say a load of positive words without actually any evidence/plan to back those words. 

Conservatism pretty much post 2016. Hate Cameron all you like (austerity sucked) but at least there was substance and vision. These idiots say whatever empty nonsense they like and can’t follow it up. Hence why with a majority of 80, Johnson’s Premiership has led to absolutely no change in anything. 

[RoboFox]

We're nosediving into a recession. 

 

The Tories have lost control of the economy.

[ozleicester]

Imagine a world where we "teach people to be gay" 

 There are so many benefits and privileges that are bestowed upon gay and trans people. 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Benguin said:

Exactly, hence the word folly. If we throw out the instructions for an ikea flat pack wardrobe, we might be able to construct it to a useable standard but we’ll definitely bodge it to some degree. 

Of course.

 

However when the chips are down you are going to have to go with the best construction idea you have in your head based on the empirical knowledge base that you have because not doing so would be worse.

 

2 hours ago, taupe said:

In honesty, I go around in circles on that one. There's a time and a place for discussion and yet there also needs to get things done. I think both are needed, the former enables that latter to be more effective (hopefully!) I've seen action log jammed by discussion/argument (I belong to a French cycling club!) and I've seen action in haste (most of mine in truth!) I don't know where the dividing line is. When do you know enough?

Of course, as Gene Kranz would say "work the problem, don't make things worse by guessing".

 

However, at some points humanity has to accept at least some knowledge as undisputably true and take action based upon it.

 

2 hours ago, pmcla26 said:

Yeah, you've got a point there that's hard to argue against. I did always think that the purpose of sex education was about safety and reproduction more than anything, but maybe I've missed the point. 

 

I can see you and Cap have had a decent conversation on this matter above.

 

48 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

We never did sex education when I was at school ,everyone seemed to get on just fine. Mind you we were a lot less messed up in those days.

Au contraire, things were equally if not more messed up - people just kept it under wraps and so it didn't become apparent to anyone who wanted to know. Abusive husbands exercising their "marital rights", sexual abuse of underage children within families and LGBT folks staying firmly in the closet for fear of societal repercussions at best and at worst...well, something much worse.

 

Let's not get a rose-tinted view here. Education on this matter was necessary then and is necessary now.

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

Of course, as Gene Kranz would say "work the problem, don't make things worse by guessing".

 

[The Fox Covert]

38 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I expect, but I don't know, it is a simplified approach and it is important to discuss and normalise it because lots of children of all ages will experience it as a direct or indirect part of their lives. Whether it is a trans parent or a gay uncle or a bisexual friend of the family. It is better to address it at a young age so that if it does impact their lives they are able to process and understand it. I'm pretty sure they don't go into the mechanics of same sex intercourse or detail the process of a sex change operation. It is going to be more along the line of Johnny has 2 Mummies and Debbie has 2 Dads, little Timmy only has one parent and they identify as they/then while Skye's parents are a thruple and all of that is ok. Whereas Kevin's Dad is a Forest fan and for that he should have his head flushed down the toilet 

Sunak and Truss are in a race for the votes of the most reactionary and bigoted Tory card-carrying members. People who believe everything that is printed in the Mail and Express and want the clock to be turned back to their young days in the 1950s. In those days kids were bullied and some really did have their heads flushed down the toilet!

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, The Fox Covert said:

Sunak and Truss are in a race for the votes of the most reactionary and bigoted Tory card-carrying members. People who believe everything that is printed in the Mail and Express and want the clock to be turned back to their young days in the 1950s. In those days kids were bullied and some really did have their heads flushed down the toilet!

The obvious reason being that for most of those people, that was a time when they had more social power. And that's what it's all about.

[bovril]

Just get Truss in now ffs, she's clearly going to win. At the very least we need some kind of leadership fast, however awful it is.

[The Fox Covert]

9 minutes ago, bovril said:

Just get Truss in now ffs, she's clearly going to win. At the very least we need some kind of leadership fast, however awful it is.

Somebody who talks down to people as though they are six year olds and she is Miss Truss from the primary schools of the fifties. Yeah right! I am just waiting for a Tory Education Secretary to say that they are going to bring back the slipper for young children and detention and caning for secondary school kids. Those kids will grow up and won't thank us for giving them such a nasty government when they were young.

[fox_up_north]

On the subject of sex education - I was the first generation to have access to internet porn. Didn't have mobiles back then, though and everything was dial up. 

 

If you think sex education is graphic, then you've probably not been in a room and caught what kids are sharing on their phones. At most, sex education involves showing approved videos made by companies that demonstrate the body. 

 

Sex education for teenagers probably needs to cover 3 main parts

- proper consent

- actual discussions of porn and what it is and isn't

- a requirement for parents to be involved

 

[taupe]

Jeez yes, you've reminded me. I saw some pretty disgusting/horrific images on  usenet newsgroups. Natural curiousity piques your interest then you wish it hadn't. I guess such stuff is on the dark web now.

[Fazzer 7]

2 hours ago, Rain King said:

Your posts suggest otherwise.

Why is that?

[Foxdiamond]

2 hours ago, bovril said:

A little bit Henry VI, clearly unfit to rule but with a loyal following who put him back on the throne. Easily manipulated by his ambitious wife. Henry VI was deeply pious and afraid of women though so I guess the comparison ends there.

 

Wars of the Roses totally exhausted the country and wiped out much of its ruling elite. I imagine a similar thing will happen to the Conservative Party.

Perhaps the Queen can lock the Tory leadership in the tower.

[Corky]

Cost of living crisis, heading towards recession and this lot bang on about woke.

 

This is what happens when you govern to 160k people instead of 60 million.

[Nalis]

3 hours ago, Captain... said:

I expect, but I don't know, it is a simplified approach and it is important to discuss and normalise it because lots of children of all ages will experience it as a direct or indirect part of their lives. Whether it is a trans parent or a gay uncle or a bisexual friend of the family. It is better to address it at a young age so that if it does impact their lives they are able to process and understand it. I'm pretty sure they don't go into the mechanics of same sex intercourse or detail the process of a sex change operation. It is going to be more along the line of Johnny has 2 Mummies and Debbie has 2 Dads, little Timmy only has one parent and they identify as they/then while Skye's parents are a thruple and all of that is ok. Whereas Kevin's Dad is a Forest fan and for that he should have his head flushed down the toilet 

No one likes Kevin's dad, not even Kevin.

[Finnegan]

3 hours ago, RoboFox said:

We're nosediving into a recession. 

 

The Tories have lost control of the economy.

 

Absolutely pains me to say anything even vaguely sympathetic to the Tories because they're absolutely part of the problem but do think the western world has lost control of capitalism to such an extent that the current global situation was always inevitable. 

 

It's not sustainable. 

 

The last century showed that a system as idealistic as communism was ultimately flawed because it would be abused by those that got in to power and realised they could. 

 

It's taken longer for capitalism to go the same way because its taken longer for the people at the top to get supremely powerful but now that that's the situation we're facing its become abundantly clear that its a system just as open to abuse to the detriment of the average worker. 

 

To that end, I can't really imagine that the country would be in a vastly different situation if Labour were in government if I'm entirely honest. We'd still be heading in to another recession regardless. 

[bovril]

10 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Absolutely pains me to say anything even vaguely sympathetic to the Tories because they're absolutely part of the problem but do think the western world has lost control of capitalism to such an extent that the current global situation was always inevitable. 

 

It's not sustainable. 

 

The last century showed that a system as idealistic as communism was ultimately flawed because it would be abused by those that got in to power and realised they could. 

 

It's taken longer for capitalism to go the same way because its taken longer for the people at the top to get supremely powerful but now that that's the situation we're facing its become abundantly clear that its a system just as open to abuse to the detriment of the average worker. 

 

To that end, I can't really imagine that the country would be in a vastly different situation if Labour were in government if I'm entirely honest. We'd still be heading in to another recession regardless. 

I don't think stuff like this is that helpful. Austerity + Brexit has made and will make Britons poorer, especially those on lower incomes. If Labour had won in 2010 I am certain Britain would be better off and EU countries may be looking to us as a relative success story not a total basket case.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/01/the-decade-that-broke-britain-the-disastrous-decisions-that-left-millions-in-a-cost-of-living-crisis

[Greg2607]

4 hours ago, Dames said:

There is a reason Boris is confident about a No.10 comeback. The forecast for the next 2 years does not look good. 

This is why I think there will be a GE soon.  Tories know they won't win. This way, they bail out and then get to blame labour for the state of the economy.  If they stay in power, no one will forget this for a generation. 

[bovril]

1 minute ago, Greg2607 said:

This is why I think there will be a GE soon.  Tories know they won't win. This way, they bail out and then get to blame labour for the state of the economy.  If they stay in power, no one will forget this for a generation. 

Or they think there's a better chance of winning now. They seem to have gone all in on US culture war stuff so maybe they think it's shit or bust now

[Finnegan]

8 minutes ago, bovril said:

I don't think stuff like this is that helpful. Austerity + Brexit has made and will make Britons poorer, especially those on lower incomes. If Labour had won in 2010 I am certain Britain would be better off and EU countries may be looking to us as a relative success story not a total basket case.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/01/the-decade-that-broke-britain-the-disastrous-decisions-that-left-millions-in-a-cost-of-living-crisis

 

Okay, yes. Just to caveat that - I think we'd be in an infinitely better situation if Brexit hadn't happened so if Cameron had lost then, sure, we'd be better off. 

 

But, maybe I'm jaded, but I really don't think we'd be vastly better off if Corbyn had gotten in post Brexit. Man wanted Leave anyway. P

[bovril]

4 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Okay, yes. Just to caveat that - I think we'd be in an infinitely better situation if Brexit hadn't happened so if Cameron had lost then, sure, we'd be better off. 

 

But, maybe I'm jaded, but I really don't think we'd be vastly better off if Corbyn had gotten in post Brexit. Man wanted Leave anyway. P

I didn't want him as PM. We might though have had at least a bit of housing or transport infrastructure built and we probably wouldn't have a hard Brexit which is disastrous for Brits long term. 

Edited 4 August 2022 by bovril

[fox_up_north]

1 hour ago, Corky said:

Cost of living crisis, heading towards recession and this lot bang on about woke.

 

This is what happens when you govern to 160k people instead of 60 million.

I wonder how many of those 160k are actively affected by the cost of living crisis...

[Finnegan]

7 minutes ago, bovril said:

I didn't want him as PM. We might though have had at least a bit of housing or transport infrastructure built and we probably wouldn't have a hard Brexit which is disastrous for Brits long term. 

 

You're probably right. I've jus become cripplingly cynical and defeatist.