Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Kemi Badenoch appointed new Minister for Women and Equalities

957 replies

Manteiga · 25/10/2022 19:21

And International Trade Secretary. I'd have preferred to see her as Secretary of State for Education in addition to Minister for Women and Equalities, but this is good news.

twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1584957913059454976

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Thread gallery
13
ArabellaScott · 30/10/2022 21:16

I am reading about the Malthusian Trap! I have really very little idea how all of this works ... and still don't really understand why we have to continue pursuing 'growth' once the standard of living gets to a decent level. There's plenty of wealth to go round already. The problem isn't the amount of wealth, it's how it distributed.

TheBiologyStupid · 30/10/2022 21:02

RedToothBrush · 30/10/2022 11:46

Indeed Frys and Caburys are really good historic examples. I don't think you can call them examples of the left either.

If memory serves they come from the Victorian rather conservative values consistent with many of the religious movements of the time such as the Methodists. These promoted the concept of dignity through hard work. The thought was that those given the opportunity to work and willing to work hard were 'morally better' in someway.

These religious movements were typically working class or lower middle class rather than middle class. We see a lot of this attitude still today in slightly different forms - its not a creation of the modern daily mail by any means. But crucially this was supported by the local community.

We see the common theme about the decline of community as part of our wider social problems but little discussion about ways in which we can create it in new ways. This is where the internet fails to provide for human needs and we can't get away from this dilemma. We need to do more to address it.

The victorian idealists who saw workers as an asset rather than a commodity to be exploited.

The philanthropy of the Victorian era where people left public legacies for the betterment of society, don't really exist in the same way in the uk either.

When the Conservatives wanted to push this idea with Big Society what didn't happen was this investment from big businesses or economic elites which would mirrored the past.

Instead it was pushed purely onto the middle class and working class, which ultimately is unsustainable with an aging population.

I also think one of the consequences of covid and Brexit has been to highlight issues with supply chains and our lack of production sector and the problems generally with outsourcing. What we perhaps need to start thinking about is if we 'buy british' and pay more for labour and better quality products it well be perversely cost effective if it means you have people who are less dependant on the state to top up their income and we keep money within our tax system rather than it going elsewhere.

This again, could be seen as right wing and nationalistic, however it has left wing economic benefits which also make sense.

Now I'm massively pro-EU but I think the way our economy has ended up structured has become problematic in the context this and the EU. That does come down to national government failures of planning and long term economic strategy not just the evil EU though.

I think we need to start to see things more as 'counterweighting'. The public interest is served best by balancing competing interests across the board.

Economically and politically.

For that we actually have to talk to an engage with both Labour and the Conservatives rather than encouraging screaming at each other.

Sorry, rambling and increasingly off topic but I'm fed up of threads like this where it is just so pathetically tribal.

Its so fucking self defeating and against our own interests.

Cadbury's, Fry's, and Rowntree's were all founded by Quakers.

DdraigGoch · 30/10/2022 20:38

MangyInseam · 30/10/2022 19:40

The fact that people didn't have all the technological advances we have today. Technological innovations happened before the explosion of economic growth.

Surely economic growth happened precisely because of those technological innovations. When the flying shuttle was invented for example, the productivity of a weaver doubled. When modern medicine and sanitation were developed, reductions in death rates caused the population to grow. This all served to grow the UK's GDP.

DdraigGoch · 30/10/2022 20:15

WahineToa · 30/10/2022 15:56

I just don’t see it as an issue that needs addressing because it’s currently not very common at all. Seems like we have been educated on it!

Just because something isn't very common, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need addressing.

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 19:49

MangyInseam · 30/10/2022 19:40

The fact that people didn't have all the technological advances we have today. Technological innovations happened before the explosion of economic growth.

I was responding to this

It's really only in the late 19th and 20th century that you have these kinds of high levels of economic growth

The vagueness of what people are after is hard to put together. It reminds me of when people talk about the economy as something negative.

What is it you’d like to see instead of what we have?

MangyInseam · 30/10/2022 19:40

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 19:18

What’s not really a function of growth?

The fact that people didn't have all the technological advances we have today. Technological innovations happened before the explosion of economic growth.

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 19:18

MangyInseam · 30/10/2022 19:15

That's not really a function of growth, though.

It is the case that a slower economy might mean innovation would be slower. On the other hand, we can all see that constant innovation has huge human costs, as well as environmental costs. So that might not be such a bad thing.

What’s not really a function of growth?

MangyInseam · 30/10/2022 19:15

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 11:01

Look where we are though in those centuries - medicine in particular, but also social change which I benefit from as a woman, that striving does have issues but I’ll gladly take this time over earlier centuries, despite those frictions.

Population growth in itself well may reverse. It does bring new problems as ageing population but at least not constant need to share resources around millions more.

That's not really a function of growth, though.

It is the case that a slower economy might mean innovation would be slower. On the other hand, we can all see that constant innovation has huge human costs, as well as environmental costs. So that might not be such a bad thing.

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 18:51

I think that there are many interconnected issues. Housing is obviously pretty important. I personally think that tax breaks are a good option to explore and could help with the housing situation. I don't think there's any obviously simple fix, but it would be good if politicians were brave enough to start putting forward some ideas.

ScrollingLeaves · 30/10/2022 18:29

beastlyslumber· Today 18:01
Don't know. The thread I referenced was about a suggested tax break. I guess things like child benefits, childcare, ability to suspend work maybe, or maintain qualifications, general financial incentives.

E.g. in Japan, women have all their medical expenses paid for and a monthly allowance paid until the child is 15. In Germany, both parents can get a cash payment. France, Norway, and Iceland also give financial incentives in the form of monthly payments. Finland, Italy and Australia also have various payments to mothers.

I'm not sure why people think it's fascism for the UK to give financial incentives to encourage more people to have kids!

And could anything be done so people can buy a house/ pay living wage compatible mortgages and rents? Even couples with jobs like being doctors and lawyers find it close to impossible to afford a house, then there is the cost of nurseries to contend with ( as much or more than some city private day schools).

I personally think people hoovering up houses and flats as investments to then let out at high prices does not help. Nor does selling off blocks of new buildings to Chinese and Russian investors. No doubt people will disagree.

Signalbox · 30/10/2022 18:06

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 17:30

What type of policies are people envisaging to encourage women to have more dc?

On the face of it I’m not keen but maybe I’m not thinking of the same policies

Just one example of a policy that might help. One of the reasons people often give for putting off having children is that they can’t afford to buy somewhere to live. And they don’t want to bring up a family in rented accommodation because there is no stability. Also the requirement for x2 incomes to afford the rent. Subsequent governments (both Labour and Tory) ignored this as an issue and instead continued to artificially prop up house prices and making it super easy for landlords to evict tenants. I don’t know what the answer is but young people have been shafted in relation to housing and some bright spark ought to be able to come up with a solution that allows young people to set up home and settle down.

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 18:01

Don't know. The thread I referenced was about a suggested tax break. I guess things like child benefits, childcare, ability to suspend work maybe, or maintain qualifications, general financial incentives.

E.g. in Japan, women have all their medical expenses paid for and a monthly allowance paid until the child is 15. In Germany, both parents can get a cash payment. France, Norway, and Iceland also give financial incentives in the form of monthly payments. Finland, Italy and Australia also have various payments to mothers.

I'm not sure why people think it's fascism for the UK to give financial incentives to encourage more people to have kids!

MarshaBradyo · 30/10/2022 17:30

What type of policies are people envisaging to encourage women to have more dc?

On the face of it I’m not keen but maybe I’m not thinking of the same policies

WahineToa · 30/10/2022 17:08

Oh it’s not your fault @beastlyslumber they’re not reading what you say anyway!

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 17:01

WahineToa · 30/10/2022 16:58

What the hell has this thread turned into? It’s gone way off and is ugly and unpleasant @Cavviesarethebest could you keep your ageist comments to yourself?

Sorry Wahine. Apparently I inadvertently summoned one of those under-bridge-dwelling creatures. I shall disengage now.

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 17:00

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:58

@beastlyslumber yiu said that a large element of immigration is a drain on resources?

it’s not.

Try reading what I wrote.

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:58

@beastlyslumber yiu said that a large element of immigration is a drain on resources?

it’s not.

WahineToa · 30/10/2022 16:58

What the hell has this thread turned into? It’s gone way off and is ugly and unpleasant @Cavviesarethebest could you keep your ageist comments to yourself?

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 16:56

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:55

@beastlyslumber economically active immigrants s are not a drain on public resources- you are confusing them with refugees/asylum seekers.

Try reading what I wrote.

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:55

@beastlyslumber economically active immigrants s are not a drain on public resources- you are confusing them with refugees/asylum seekers.

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 16:54

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:53

@beastlyslumber hows Brexit working out for you then?

Oh I get it now. You're one of those.

Signalbox · 30/10/2022 16:53

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:31

@Signalbox the primary argument to support population growth is to support the excising aging population?

im the uk specifically the main issue with the fact that population replacement is low is that it reduces the workforce to care for the elderly population

there are very few - if any? - people arguing for women to have more babies just because

I understand the argument. Perhaps you could make it without implying that older people are greedy and anti-immigrant. Although perhaps that would demolish your argument. You are clearly happy for the uk to use the offspring of immigrants to support an ageing population but to suggest we should provide our own carers is somehow unpalatable.

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:53

@beastlyslumber hows Brexit working out for you then?

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 16:53

governments using women as brood mares.

You are being ridiculous.

beastlyslumber · 30/10/2022 16:52

Cavviesarethebest · 30/10/2022 16:41

@beastlyslumber so what is the primary argument for government manipulating the procreation choices of women if it is not to provide a workforce for the aging population?

Why don't you find out something for yourself? Your arguments are based on nothing but assumptions and stereotypes. Who said anything about government "manipulating the procreation choices of women... to provide a workforce for the ageing population"? Literally no one... except for you.

The entire economy depends on people being able to work and contribute. Yes, this includes elderly care, but that's only one part of it. Literally every single aspect of economic life is affected. You need people to work on farms, in hospitals, in government, in education, in call centres. You need people who are able to work. You need families who are involved in economic life.

why do you think increasing immigration to is a bad idea?

I didn't say it was a bad idea. I said it has downsides. At the moment we have a large element of immigration which is a drain on public resources, so that's an issue. Where we have immigrants who bring skills and expertise, that's good for us, but those people might not stay forever. They don't necessarily have loyalty or a sense of belonging. There's also issues with the mixing of different cultural values, which is not always straightforward. I don't think we should be relying on immigration to keep our country economically viable.