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.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.
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"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.
Full state pension it ****, I need to work to pay for things like my house, eating etc.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.
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?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"
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.
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?Does it have to be deliberate or conscious to be misogyny?
Farage’s photo with Musk and Nick Candy defines his Trump tribute act era | Nigel Farage | The Guardian
Eight years after an awkward ‘bad boys of Brexit’ snap at Trump Tower’s lift, Reform’s leader is a Mar-a-Lago insideramp.theguardian.com
View attachment 22302
Embarrassing.
Though, seriously, the whole idea of Musk donating 100 million to Reform is a bit mental