• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

Its the lateness in their lives they were informed of the changes. I've never seen the time frame they were screwed to see if that was a justified argument.
It was announced that the pension age would be brought in line in 1993 with the transition happening between 2010 and 2020. The final date was brought forward to 2018 rather than 2020 and then in 2020 the age for both men and women was raised from 65 to 66.

Sorry but if you have a 30 year lead in time with the change phased in over 8 years, claiming you weren't given enough time to prepare is ********.

There have been far bigger impacts on people's earnings with far less time to prepare over that period.
 
 
It was announced that the pension age would be brought in line in 1993 with the transition happening between 2010 and 2020. The final date was brought forward to 2018 rather than 2020 and then in 2020 the age for both men and women was raised from 65 to 66.

Sorry but if you have a 30 year lead in time with the change phased in over 8 years, claiming you weren't given enough time to prepare is ********.

There have been far bigger impacts on people's earnings with far less time to prepare over that period.
Isn't part of the issue around 2022 Labour were being all supportive and calling for justice. Now they're all very much "No problem to see here"
 
You currently need 35 qualifying years for a full state pension. Once you reach that and can afford to retire why work longer? Unless you really enjoy your work or need to.
 
Some people need to realise that life isn't always fair and from time to time there will be a minority of people who will feel that they have lost out when it comes to a change in the law (a few weeks ago it was farmers with the inheritance tax law changes). ln an ideal world we'd all get a heads up on every pertinent law change years in advance but in a democracy where power switches between two political parties it's just not realistic.

It's all about priorities and the Government simply can't throw money at everything. I'm sorry for the Waspi women who feel they have lost out but I'd rather my tax was spent on things like compensating victims of the blood and post office scandals.
 
Last edited:
You currently need 35 qualifying years for a full state pension. Once you reach that and can afford to retire why work longer? Unless you really enjoy your work or need to.
Full state pension it ****, I need to work to pay for things like my house, eating etc.

Lets not forget many people complaining have gold plated work pensions.

One of the changes to women was you didn't qualify if you raised kids, now you do so they complain that whilst they knew the rules when raising a family they can't take advantage todays women can. (forgetting it was perfectly possible to live on one household wage back then).
 
Should note I have little truck, my grandmother who was divorced with 5 kids by her mid-30's work extra shifts in her late 50's, early 60's to get her full stamp.
 
Isn't part of the issue around 2022 Labour were being all supportive and calling for justice. Now they're all very much "No problem to see here"
I think that's a separate issue regarding politicians being like wind vanes rather than the fairness of the issue at hand. It's not that we've gone from an equal position to an unequal one, we've gone from an unequal one to an equal one. Yes they've had to wait longer now for their pension but, in the time between them first being informed and it being implemented, I was born, went through school, went through uni and got a job and left home. They are telling me they couldn't have reworked some of their plans in that same time frame and that somehow equal state pension age is unjust?

It's just a usual case of people who had a beneficial position losing it and complaining about the new equality. Normally it's men losing it to women, or majorities to minorities, but this case it was very much the previous system was absolute nonsense. Women getting the pension younger whilst living longer?
 
This reminded me about a news story that go top billing on BBC and Sky last week called "Medical Misogyny". It was about women with period pain feeling left out or ignored by the NHS. Of course I have a lot of sympathy for them but it really annoys me when the misogyny card is played like this which just devalues genuine cases of misogyny. I highly doubt there was a conscious attempt to deny women treatment because of their gender. The root cause was more likely down to years of Government neglect and underfunding of the NHS which has impacted everyone regardless of gender.

I really wish media organisations would stop playing the gender/misogyny card at every opportunity. I'm all for shining a light on injustices and incidents that warrant it but misleading stunts like this simply increase the divide between men and women which has been growing since me2.
 
Last edited:
Does it have to be deliberate or conscious to be misogyny?
When a woman dies of an undiagnosed heart attack because 111 / their GP / whoever else didn't know the different presentations of MI in women vs men better because they're not deliberately misinformed?

Healthcare provision is absolutely suffering from decades of gender discrimination - whether misogynistic or not. So much is based on "the typical man" who often presents differently from "the typical woman".
It's based in a way-larger-than-should-be way by the personal bias of the provider - who is far more likely to identify and consider important things they can relate to - this shouldn't be too big a deal in General Practice as the gender gap is pretty equal now, but certainly has that history.
This is a problem that goes way back, and is merely being slowly corrected. Systemic racism is a thing, as is systemic sexism (and agism, and plenty of other -isms)

Minimising other peoples' suffering because it annoys you... isn't really cool either IMO.
 
Last edited:
Does it have to be deliberate or conscious to be misogyny?
When a woman dies of an undiagnosed heart attack because 111 / their GP / whoever else didn't know the different presentations of MI in women vs men better because they're not deliberately misinformed?

Healthcare provision is absolutely suffering from decades of gender discrimination - whether misogynistic or not. So much is based on "the typical man" who often presents differently from "the typical woman".
It's based in a way-larger-than-should-be way by the personal bias of the provider - who is far more likely to identify and consider important things they can relate to - this shouldn't be too big a deal in General Practice as the gender gap is pretty equal now, but certainly has that history.
This is a problem that goes way back, and is merely being slowly corrected. Systemic racism is a thing, as is systemic sexism (and agism, and plenty of other -isms)

Minimising other peoples' suffering because it annoys you... isn't really cool either IMO.

I posted "Of course I have a lot of sympathy for them" and so you can jog on with that 'minimising other people's suffering' characterisation which was really poor. I think it's disgraceful that women and girls feel they have been overlooked and haven't received the treatment they needed when it comes to women's health.

I'll simply repeat what I posted earlier "The root cause was more likely down to years of Government neglect and underfunding of the NHS which has impacted everyone regardless of gender." Suicide among young men is increasing and the lack of investment in mental health treatment has to be a significant factor with that. There is currently no routine prostate cancer screening in the UK. There will be many other examples affecting both women and men. Nobody is denying the existence of systemic discrimination in society but let's not deny what the real root cause is when it comes to people not getting the healthcare they need and that's where the focus should be IMO.
 
Last edited:
Then I'd disagree.
Which isn't remotely to minimise the impact of underfunding, but healthcare is demonstrably sexist - which isn't to do with funding, it's to do with systemic sexism since the advent of modern medicine.

It's across all healthcare in all countries, far from unique to the NHS
Interesting that you agree that there is systemic discrimination, whilst seeming to deny systemic discrimination in this instance

Oh, and sorry - it really did sound like were minimising their suffering by not believing it. I fully accept that I sometimes read too quickly and miss stuff.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I'm not denying that it exists within healthcare. When it comes to managing period pain (the example cited above) I just hold the view that a large proportion of those women (many of whom will have female GPs) could have been helped with more funding and better management of those funds which IMO is the main underlying root cause. You're free to disagree.

FTR I'd also be in favour of a root & branch review to address discrimination and attitudes within healthcare (not easy granted) which again comes back to resource scarcity and lack of funding. All I want is the responsible politicians (past and present PMs, Chancellors & SOS for Health) to be accountable when it comes to healthcare.

No worries on the last part.
 
Last edited:
Does it have to be deliberate or conscious to be misogyny?
Yes. Misogyny is a strong prejudice against women and girls, usually involving hatred, distrust and contempt. If there is no intent by the person then it isn't misogyny and, as Melchett says, it cheapens the meaning to the word if it is labelled as such. Problems due to ignorance or poor training are not misogyny. Could we say the significantly reduced interest in prostate cancer compared to breast cancer is misandry? Perhaps the massively skewed access to mental health services between men and women? The significant gap in suicide rates between the 2?

There are imbalances between how different groups are treated and these are a problem, nobody denies that, but to attribute it to malice off the bat is not productive to fixing it.
 
But isn't instructional racism where there isn't intent but the structures of an organisation reenforce racism.

Isn't the same true for misogyny?
 

View attachment 22302

Embarrassing.

Though, seriously, the whole idea of Musk donating 100 million to Reform is a bit mental

Christmas is known for the three wise men but in this case we have three complete bell ends.

I heard today that Farage has been to America six times since he became an MP five months ago.
 
Two thoughts
.
One that picture in the back ground is bloody horrible.

The second being that Reform might be taking money from an African migrant who got Canadian citizenship from his mother and there are debates about if he was legally in the US when studying \ working. Nigel will of course not know this.
 
MAGA lunatics now making a point of harassing and threatening left wing media, commentators and their families.



USA continues to trudge down the road to dictatorship...
 

Latest posts

Top