|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 16, 2013 10:45:08 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2394420/UKIPs-Stuart-Wheeler-says-women-play-chess-boardroom.htmlWhat was that Cameron said about them being 'A Bunch Of Fruitcakes, Loonies And Closet Racists'? Maybe 'sexists' ought to be added to the list! Or perhaps it just comes under the 'fruitcakes' and 'loonies' bit. What an utterly stupid thing to say. If that is the kind of idiot that holds top posts within UKIP, maybe people ought to think a little harder about that before supporting them. There's more UKIP idiocy mentioned further down the page on the same link: Ummm....did nobody in their party think to check at all?! And this is supposed to be the 'rising force' in UK politics?! (that's 'fOrce', not 'fArce'...apparently!)
|
|
|
|
Post by dangermouse on Aug 16, 2013 11:03:21 GMT
He really has that slightly dishevelled, wild-eyed look down pat.
|
|
diuretic
Scribe
Posts: 49 
Politics: Centre Left
|
Post by diuretic on Aug 16, 2013 12:18:09 GMT
Gail Kelly probably doesn't play chess. link |
|
|
|
Post by dangermouse on Aug 16, 2013 16:30:28 GMT
Victoria Coren is a famous British poker player who's won a million pounds or two in her time.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamora on Aug 17, 2013 16:15:51 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2394420/UKIPs-Stuart-Wheeler-says-women-play-chess-boardroom.htmlWhat was that Cameron said about them being 'A Bunch Of Fruitcakes, Loonies And Closet Racists'? Maybe 'sexists' ought to be added to the list! Or perhaps it just comes under the 'fruitcakes' and 'loonies' bit. What an utterly stupid thing to say. If that is the kind of idiot that holds top posts within UKIP, maybe people ought to think a little harder about that before supporting them. There's more UKIP idiocy mentioned further down the page on the same link: Ummm....did nobody in their party think to check at all?! And this is supposed to be the 'rising force' in UK politics?! (that's 'fOrce', not 'fArce'...apparently!) I'm surprised you expect to be taken seriously in introducing this subject with a Daily Mail article. Might it not have been better to at least start with an actual interview? What Wheeler was saying is that we shouldn't have positive discrimination, ie no quotas. Not being a politician and more used to discussions in the House of Lords and in gentleman's clubs, he made his point a little clumsily. Imo he's still absolutely right. www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01f6x22And with an increasing membership base, its best ever local election results, defecting councillors, and the Conservative grassroots close to being in freefall, UKIP is without doubt a rising force. |
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 17, 2013 18:10:06 GMT
I'm surprised you expect to be taken seriously in introducing this subject with a Daily Mail article. Might it not have been better to at least start with an actual interview? What Wheeler was saying is that we shouldn't have positive discrimination, ie no quotas. Not being a politician and more used to discussions in the House of Lords and in gentleman's clubs, he made his point a little clumsily. Imo he's still absolutely right. www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01f6x22 A little clumsily?!! I could have picked any source about it, obviously. Would you prefer the Telegraph? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10244637/Ukip-treasurer-Women-are-not-competitive-enough-for-the-board-room.htmlHe tries to backtrack in that BBC interview....not very successfully, frankly! He comes across as a stereotypical old so-and-so who hasn't moved on from Victorian ideas about gender roles. If this is what UKIP have to offer, then their little success bubble gained from the anti-EU protest vote won't get them very far at all. And with an increasing membership base, its best ever local election results, defecting councillors, and the Conservative grassroots close to being in freefall, UKIP is without doubt a rising force. It's an anti EU protest vote, nothing more, appealing especially to those elements within the traditional support (and membership) of the Tory party who haven't managed to move themselves beyond the idea of the an Empire on which the sun never sets. Thankfully, the rest of the world has moved on from that. |
|
|
|
Post by dangermouse on Aug 17, 2013 19:53:21 GMT
If they split the Tory vote then at least they will have served a useful purpose. The problem in British politics lies in there no longer being a party of the left. Labour is merely Conservative lite.
|
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 17, 2013 21:10:03 GMT
Labour at the moment is merely 'whatever this government says we say is wrong, but we won't tell you what we would do instead, and we won't say we'll undo whatever they are doing'. Totally devoid of ideas, and totally devoid of leadership - the worst opposition I have ever seen, and the least honest, too. And, of course, they created the mess we're currently in. The conflict between their union masters and their corporate masters has crippled them entirely - they can't say or do anything because one side of their sponsors or the other will be annoyed with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamora on Aug 18, 2013 10:25:09 GMT
I'm surprised you expect to be taken seriously in introducing this subject with a Daily Mail article. Might it not have been better to at least start with an actual interview? What Wheeler was saying is that we shouldn't have positive discrimination, ie no quotas. Not being a politician and more used to discussions in the House of Lords and in gentleman's clubs, he made his point a little clumsily. Imo he's still absolutely right. www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01f6x22 A little clumsily?!! I could have picked any source about it, obviously. Would you prefer the Telegraph? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10244637/Ukip-treasurer-Women-are-not-competitive-enough-for-the-board-room.htmlHe tries to backtrack in that BBC interview....not very successfully, frankly! He comes across as a stereotypical old so-and-so who hasn't moved on from Victorian ideas about gender roles. If this is what UKIP have to offer, then their little success bubble gained from the anti-EU protest vote won't get them very far at all. And with an increasing membership base, its best ever local election results, defecting councillors, and the Conservative grassroots close to being in freefall, UKIP is without doubt a rising force. It's an anti EU protest vote, nothing more, appealing especially to those elements within the traditional support (and membership) of the Tory party who haven't managed to move themselves beyond the idea of the an Empire on which the sun never sets. Thankfully, the rest of the world has moved on from that. I guess I just don't get offended over the same things you do! As far as I'm concerned Wheeler didn't need to backtrack at all. He made his point and I agree with it. I disagree with quotas. Do you think they're a good idea? UKIP has become so much more than the anti-EU protest organisation it started out as. To suggest it 'won't get very far' is to imagine that people will forever be satisfied with being shafted. UKIP will succeed unless another party comes to take on the mainstream parties, and there's no sign of that happening, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 19, 2013 18:27:43 GMT
I guess I just don't get offended over the same things you do! As far as I'm concerned Wheeler didn't need to backtrack at all. He made his point and I agree with it. I disagree with quotas. Do you think they're a good idea? I don't agree with 'quotas' at all, and never have. However, I don't oppose them on the grounds that women aren't really suited to the boardroom like men are, which was his justification for opposing them. I oppose them because they are just a clumsy attempt to address a symptom of a problem, to avoid having to look more deeply into the problem itself. Part of the problem itself, of course, is backwards, medieval attitudes like his among those 'old boys' who are supposed to be appointing people to such senior positions based on actual merit. |
|
|
|
Post by tamora on Aug 20, 2013 17:53:12 GMT
I guess I just don't get offended over the same things you do! As far as I'm concerned Wheeler didn't need to backtrack at all. He made his point and I agree with it. I disagree with quotas. Do you think they're a good idea? I don't agree with 'quotas' at all, and never have. However, I don't oppose them on the grounds that women aren't really suited to the boardroom like men are, which was his justification for opposing them. I oppose them because they are just a clumsy attempt to address a symptom of a problem, to avoid having to look more deeply into the problem itself. Part of the problem itself, of course, is backwards, medieval attitudes like his among those 'old boys' who are supposed to be appointing people to such senior positions based on actual merit. What you or I think is irrelevant. What David Cameron thinks isn't really relevant either. Is it surprising that Cameron won't rule out quotas? I don't really care why Wheeler doesn't support quotas, but I'm very pleased that he and UKIP don't. If the company isn't publicly owned, the government, and certainly the European Commission, should not be dictating who it promotes. As a woman I don't want to be promoted to make up a politcally imposed 'quota'. The proposal is patronising in the extreme. If I can't advance on merit I don't deserve to. You might also like to read this report on the subject: www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/janice-atkinson/stuart-wheeler-women-on-top_b_3762722.html |
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 21, 2013 22:23:12 GMT
I don't really care why Wheeler doesn't support quotas, but I'm very pleased that he and UKIP don't. It's vitally important to do things for the right reasons in a case like this, though. Opposing them on the grounds that women shouldn't really be there anyway because they aren't going to be as good at it as men is failing to recognise that there actually are 'glass ceilings' and real issues of irrational discrimination that still exist (largely because of such outdated attitudes as the one that is being used by him as a reason for opposing quotas). Quotas may be the wrong approach to addressing the issue, but that's not sufficient reason for ignoring the issue itself. As a woman I don't want to be promoted to make up a politcally imposed 'quota'. The proposal is patronising in the extreme. If I can't advance on merit I don't deserve to. Quite right, but neither do you deserve to not advance even though you have the merit on the grounds that a man would be better even if he doesn't have the merits you have, because women just aren't so good at that kind of thing as men (which is exactly his justification for opposing quotas). Quotas may be the wrong approach to addressing the issue, but that's not sufficient reason for ignoring the issue itself. |
|
|
|
Post by tamora on Aug 23, 2013 15:51:53 GMT
I don't really care why Wheeler doesn't support quotas, but I'm very pleased that he and UKIP don't. It's vitally important to do things for the right reasons in a case like this, though. Opposing them on the grounds that women shouldn't really be there anyway because they aren't going to be as good at it as men is failing to recognise that there actually are 'glass ceilings' and real issues of irrational discrimination that still exist (largely because of such outdated attitudes as the one that is being used by him as a reason for opposing quotas). Quotas may be the wrong approach to addressing the issue, but that's not sufficient reason for ignoring the issue itself. As a woman I don't want to be promoted to make up a politcally imposed 'quota'. The proposal is patronising in the extreme. If I can't advance on merit I don't deserve to. Quite right, but neither do you deserve to not advance even though you have the merit on the grounds that a man would be better even if he doesn't have the merits you have, because women just aren't so good at that kind of thing as men (which is exactly his justification for opposing quotas). Quotas may be the wrong approach to addressing the issue, but that's not sufficient reason for ignoring the issue itself. I see a different issue. For me the issue is the state and the EU involving themselves in issues in which they should have no place. A company that isn't being funded by the tax payers should be free to judge the best candidate for any postion. Wheeler's justifications are not important to me. (Obviously I don't agree with every opinion of every UKIP official any more than I assume you agree with everything every Tory official says.) I support UKIP's policy because I think it is the right one, not because of anything Wheeler has said. UKIP isn't opposed to women advancing, but the party still thinks companies shouldn't be under any obligation to favour them. As we agree that quotas are the wrong way and even if I thought women would benefit from this patronising help, how could it be delivered without state authoritarianism? European Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding can shove her proposal up Van Rompuy. You didn't comment on anything written in my last link, so how about this one instead? www.iea.org.uk/blog/gender-quotas-the-left%E2%80%99s-version-of-trickle-down-economics |
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 24, 2013 18:40:39 GMT
The IEA isn't a credible source. The piece is also rather low brow, blowing bubbles over some fake feminists and classical liberal distinction. The use of quotas, for example, is typically a reference to the 'theory of the second best'. That is orthodox economics. |
|
|
|
Post by tamora on Aug 25, 2013 9:48:54 GMT
The IEA isn't a credible source. The piece is also rather low brow, blowing bubbles over some fake feminists and classical liberal distinction. The use of quotas, for example, is typically a reference to the 'theory of the second best'. That is orthodox economics. I'm not sure how you got 'blowing bubbles over fake feminists' from the IEA article, but the the CBI and the IOD are also against quotas. Are you? |
|
