Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Rising Christian nationalism: a threat to us all

439 replies

IwantToRetire · 18/09/2025 18:41

Article by Humanist UK, so doesn't really reflect on the impact on women although does mention abortion rights.

But I do think that our politics are far more influenced by the US, not for any deep reasons, but so much of our TV is now americanised.

And some of the fundamentalist UD christian groups have very regressive attitude towards women.

https://humanists.uk/2025/09/17/rising-christian-nationalism-a-threat-to-us-all/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 10:37

Magdalen laundries were invented in England and were not initially, or later exclusively, Catholic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_laundry, homosexual acts and abortion were illegal under legislation inherited from Westminster, illegitimacy remained a concept in most European legal systems until the late 20th C, barrier contraceptives could not be sold but the contraceptive pill was always legal. All of that was civil law. As was divorce- opposition to that, demonstrated in the first referendum, was mostly about property rights and inheritance, not religion.

The church was given the job of running what had been the workhouses, and, as in all countries, the very poor, and the children of the very poor, and very poor women had worse experiences than others. It has been fashionable in Ireland, particularly since the Belfield generation took over the media, to blame 'the Church' for everything bad, but look at how secular countries treated people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Human_sterilization_in_Switzerland

'Belfield generation' my shorthand for the middle class aspirant Marxist misogynists who graduated from ca1970 on. Most of them got careers in academia or the public sector; they all got less sex than they wanted because of 'the Church' and every single one of them burned down the British Embassy. Or so they have told me. Not reliable sources of historical information.

Mistrust RTÉ and the IT.

Merrymouse · 28/09/2025 10:48

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 10:37

Magdalen laundries were invented in England and were not initially, or later exclusively, Catholic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_laundry, homosexual acts and abortion were illegal under legislation inherited from Westminster, illegitimacy remained a concept in most European legal systems until the late 20th C, barrier contraceptives could not be sold but the contraceptive pill was always legal. All of that was civil law. As was divorce- opposition to that, demonstrated in the first referendum, was mostly about property rights and inheritance, not religion.

The church was given the job of running what had been the workhouses, and, as in all countries, the very poor, and the children of the very poor, and very poor women had worse experiences than others. It has been fashionable in Ireland, particularly since the Belfield generation took over the media, to blame 'the Church' for everything bad, but look at how secular countries treated people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Human_sterilization_in_Switzerland

'Belfield generation' my shorthand for the middle class aspirant Marxist misogynists who graduated from ca1970 on. Most of them got careers in academia or the public sector; they all got less sex than they wanted because of 'the Church' and every single one of them burned down the British Embassy. Or so they have told me. Not reliable sources of historical information.

Mistrust RTÉ and the IT.

Also, treatment of native Americans and Aborigines in the 20th century - forced sterilisation of women, forced adoption of children, children forced into the care of the state - and also British children forced to migrate to Australia until the 1960s.

All policies that presumably were justified as being for the greater good, whether for utilitarian or religious reasons.

SionnachRuadh · 28/09/2025 11:09

Merrymouse · 28/09/2025 10:48

Also, treatment of native Americans and Aborigines in the 20th century - forced sterilisation of women, forced adoption of children, children forced into the care of the state - and also British children forced to migrate to Australia until the 1960s.

All policies that presumably were justified as being for the greater good, whether for utilitarian or religious reasons.

We've just been hearing about the forced contraception scandal in Greenland, which, considering Greenland's tiny population, is certainly close to genocidal.

It wasn't religious fanatics that did that. It was Danish social democrats, very much akin to the British Fabians who were also big eugenics enthusiasts.

Christopher Hitchens had an annoying habit of No True Scotsmaning any atheist or secular government/movement he disapproved of by claiming it was really religious, and conversely claiming that religious people in history who he admired must have been secretly atheist. Christopher was a clever man, but he could be extremely silly at times.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:28

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 10:37

Magdalen laundries were invented in England and were not initially, or later exclusively, Catholic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_laundry, homosexual acts and abortion were illegal under legislation inherited from Westminster, illegitimacy remained a concept in most European legal systems until the late 20th C, barrier contraceptives could not be sold but the contraceptive pill was always legal. All of that was civil law. As was divorce- opposition to that, demonstrated in the first referendum, was mostly about property rights and inheritance, not religion.

The church was given the job of running what had been the workhouses, and, as in all countries, the very poor, and the children of the very poor, and very poor women had worse experiences than others. It has been fashionable in Ireland, particularly since the Belfield generation took over the media, to blame 'the Church' for everything bad, but look at how secular countries treated people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Human_sterilization_in_Switzerland

'Belfield generation' my shorthand for the middle class aspirant Marxist misogynists who graduated from ca1970 on. Most of them got careers in academia or the public sector; they all got less sex than they wanted because of 'the Church' and every single one of them burned down the British Embassy. Or so they have told me. Not reliable sources of historical information.

Mistrust RTÉ and the IT.

I haven't got my info from RTE or the Irish Times. I am taking a project on the Magdalene Laundries for university history right now, a lot of my information comes from reading direct survivor testimony or concerns at the time. I appreciate the info on the Belfield generation but I don't think this has strongly influenced my perspective, though I accept I may be wrong.

To take one by one-

Yes, homosexuality and abortion were banned under laws inherited from the UK, but why did it take Ireland 24 years longer than the UK to decriminalise homosexuality and 51 years longer to decriminalise abortion? It seems to abdicate responsibility to just blame the UK. Reminds me of how other countries justify anti-gay laws - 'the UK did it'- despite having years of independence to change them.

The Eight Amendment which created near total abortion ban was passed in 1983, that was not inherited from the UK by any means, which had legalised for 16 years by them.

Fair enough that illegitimacy remained a concept for a long time for many others . But surely you accept that the stigma was much harsher in Ireland?

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:39

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 10:37

Magdalen laundries were invented in England and were not initially, or later exclusively, Catholic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_laundry, homosexual acts and abortion were illegal under legislation inherited from Westminster, illegitimacy remained a concept in most European legal systems until the late 20th C, barrier contraceptives could not be sold but the contraceptive pill was always legal. All of that was civil law. As was divorce- opposition to that, demonstrated in the first referendum, was mostly about property rights and inheritance, not religion.

The church was given the job of running what had been the workhouses, and, as in all countries, the very poor, and the children of the very poor, and very poor women had worse experiences than others. It has been fashionable in Ireland, particularly since the Belfield generation took over the media, to blame 'the Church' for everything bad, but look at how secular countries treated people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Human_sterilization_in_Switzerland

'Belfield generation' my shorthand for the middle class aspirant Marxist misogynists who graduated from ca1970 on. Most of them got careers in academia or the public sector; they all got less sex than they wanted because of 'the Church' and every single one of them burned down the British Embassy. Or so they have told me. Not reliable sources of historical information.

Mistrust RTÉ and the IT.

Yes,to some extent the Pill was legal from 1963. But that's not the full story.

It had to be marketed as a 'cycle regulator' to circumvent the ban. In 1979 it became legal for official family planning for married couples only. It was only in 1992 that unmarried women were officially able to buy the Pill.

Compare that the UK, where unmarried women could officially access the Pill from 1967. Or other Catholic countries for that matter : Spain and Italy both legalised in 1978 and 1971 and the former was just emerging from Franco, as we've said.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:40

SionnachRuadh · 28/09/2025 11:09

We've just been hearing about the forced contraception scandal in Greenland, which, considering Greenland's tiny population, is certainly close to genocidal.

It wasn't religious fanatics that did that. It was Danish social democrats, very much akin to the British Fabians who were also big eugenics enthusiasts.

Christopher Hitchens had an annoying habit of No True Scotsmaning any atheist or secular government/movement he disapproved of by claiming it was really religious, and conversely claiming that religious people in history who he admired must have been secretly atheist. Christopher was a clever man, but he could be extremely silly at times.

Exactly, both are capable of great good and great evil...

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:44

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 10:37

Magdalen laundries were invented in England and were not initially, or later exclusively, Catholic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_laundry, homosexual acts and abortion were illegal under legislation inherited from Westminster, illegitimacy remained a concept in most European legal systems until the late 20th C, barrier contraceptives could not be sold but the contraceptive pill was always legal. All of that was civil law. As was divorce- opposition to that, demonstrated in the first referendum, was mostly about property rights and inheritance, not religion.

The church was given the job of running what had been the workhouses, and, as in all countries, the very poor, and the children of the very poor, and very poor women had worse experiences than others. It has been fashionable in Ireland, particularly since the Belfield generation took over the media, to blame 'the Church' for everything bad, but look at how secular countries treated people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Human_sterilization_in_Switzerland

'Belfield generation' my shorthand for the middle class aspirant Marxist misogynists who graduated from ca1970 on. Most of them got careers in academia or the public sector; they all got less sex than they wanted because of 'the Church' and every single one of them burned down the British Embassy. Or so they have told me. Not reliable sources of historical information.

Mistrust RTÉ and the IT.

It also seems odd to refer to Switzerland and the UK as 'secular' countries in that context, esp since we've been discussing how the UK was until recently a pretty religious country.

Religion has also been important to many Swiss and still is though it's declining.

PraisebetoGod · 28/09/2025 11:46

PauliesWalnuts · 18/09/2025 20:25

The one thing I’m not worried about is the rise of Christianity in the UK. Churchgoing has never been lower and will never recover. Opening shops on a Sunday put paid to that (and I’m not objecting to that). I am a pro-choice, pro-divorce, pro-contraception, pro-sex before marriage, gender critical church going catholic woman (if you can get your head around that mess!) and I am very aware that I will continue to be in a minority. The only churches which remain popular are some of the pastor-led African Christian churches and you won’t see many Reformers in there.

How does that work you being pro contraception, pro divorce etc whilst also claiming to be Catholic? Genuinely interested as a Catholic woman myself.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:49

PraisebetoGod · 28/09/2025 11:46

How does that work you being pro contraception, pro divorce etc whilst also claiming to be Catholic? Genuinely interested as a Catholic woman myself.

Some Catholics do support contraception and divorce, probably the first more than the second. I take it you wouldn't see them as true Catholics?

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 11:51

In working out why societies did what they did when they did, it's useful to look at the background. In the UK and Europe, massive social-class shifting wars on the continent and in Asia in the late 1910s and again in the mid 1930s to mid 1940s. In Ireland brutal insurgency and counterinsurgency in our own streets and farmyards for a decade, followed by partition and a decade of dire poverty. The collective wish to establish a stable society was very strong. Nails that stuck out got hammered in. Which was horrible.

I don't think the stigma re illegitimacy was harder - plenty of mid-century English fiction has that lurking in the background. I think in a small country it was harder for people to move to a place where your history wasn't known without emigrating. But again - look at my links in the last post to see how the poor were treated in other countries. Also see how they treated the mentally ill.

My parents were economic migrants in the 1950s, and I grew up in lower middle class suburban England until my early teens (without any religious affiliation) and am always amazed at the attitudes and behaviors Irish people think are uniquely Irish - see the carry-on during the summer from people who were hit when they were at school. Yes, it was nasty, I remember it well, but not from Ireland.

The 1983 referendum was a disaster whatever way you cut it, but it was driven by a lay movement, not by 'the Church' (religious run hospitals never carried out abortions, but did know there were cases where non-viable pregnancies had to be ended for the health of the woman). Anyway, 40 years was long enough for me to have to argue that one.

persephonia · 28/09/2025 11:51

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 02:14

I definitely agree somewhat...thunk the JKR trolls comparison is too harsh though.

I do get a bit fed up at the veneration of Tom Holland's book. He made good points but I do think some were a bit overstated. As we've said, Christianity definitely encourages better attitudes to slaves but it never forbids it. If Christianity is so intrinsically and unambiguously opposed to slavery, how come slavery was so widely permitted in Christendom until the early 19th century?

Similarly, democracy. Christianity is definitely more friendly to democracy than others but full democracy still only became widespread in Europe in the mid-20th century (think of places like France etc waiting until the 1940s to give women the vote).

I also think a lot of the effects of British Christianity are more characteristics of Britain rather than Christianity. This might sound a bit garbled - what I mean is that Christianity has had very different effects in different places. Attitudes to women in say, Mexico are different from attitudes in France. British colonialism, while brutal at times, was far far less so than French, German or Belgian. Yet these countries were all Christian. Obviously 20th century Ireland is a very disturbing example of Cathlocism getting out of hand in a way it hasn't in other Catholic countries, at least not to the same extent. Christianity did not prevent the rise of dictatorships and genocide in Germany, Italy, Spain etc in fact, in Spain for instance much of the Church cravenly kowtowed to Franco.

I suppose what I'm getting at is that Christianity has influenced all of Europe, and the very particular way Britain (or more specifically England) has developed isn't JUST applicable to Christianity, or even Protestant Christianity for that matter.

I agree, its more complicated than just Christianity! I was reading a really good book -Prisoners of Geography about the impact of Geography on wars/societies/geopolitics. It's really interesting, but because of the focus it is very much "everything is geography". That's not the author being misleading- he is clear that the angle he's writing from is the geographical one therefore all the focus is on that. Same with Tom Holland, the angle he is looking at is the impact of Christianity. So the book is that. The danger is if you only had that perspective and then extrapolated from that to draw wider conclusions about the state of the world/future. It's easy to, in a very logical way, go completely mad if you only have one angle.
There are also popular books written that explain how everything in history happened because of weather, or because of disease or because of rats. All "true".

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:53

PraisebetoGod · 28/09/2025 11:46

How does that work you being pro contraception, pro divorce etc whilst also claiming to be Catholic? Genuinely interested as a Catholic woman myself.

Surveys show huge numbers of Catholics support contraception.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2024/09/26/overwhelming-majority-of-american-catholics-want-church-to-change-stance-on-birth-control-new-poll-says/&ved=2ahUKEwi-lt61pPuPAxXCUUEAHbgiCtoQFnoECE4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1NFkpR4YFnqpSUmhuoxGm0

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/contraception_1.shtml%23:~:text%3DThe%2520Tablet%2520survey,the%2520teaching%2520should%2520be%2520revised.&ved=2ahUKEwixhKzPpPuPAxUAWEEAHbZ8CScQzsoNegQIDBAU&usg=AOvVaw1FGUzAqdTwIyoSBoKOF1uf

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/contraception-univision-poll-and-pope&ved=2ahUKEwjSt77ipPuPAxUiW0EAHXNJF4UQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0ckRdqBXOevXflMGM78UQD

http://univision.data4.mx/resultados_catolicos/eng/ENG_catholic-survey.pdf

In your view, PraiseBe, are these surveys inaccurate? Or are the people replying not proper Catholics?

https://www.google.com/url?opi=89978449&rct=j&sa=t&source=web&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncronline.org%2Fblogs%2Fncr-today%2Fcontraception-univision-poll-and-pope&usg=AOvVaw0ckRdqBXOevXflMGM78UQD&ved=2ahUKEwjSt77ipPuPAxUiW0EAHXNJF4UQFnoECBwQAQ

JamieCannister · 28/09/2025 11:56

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:49

Some Catholics do support contraception and divorce, probably the first more than the second. I take it you wouldn't see them as true Catholics?

I can understand someone claiming to be a christian, and have an affinity with catholicism, and even to attend a catholic church because it is the most suitable nearby church... but to say "I'm a catholic who ignores some of what the Pope says because I'm right and he's wrong" seems a bit nonsensical.

TempestTost · 28/09/2025 11:57

There is no such thing as "just an atheist" unless we are speaking about a vacuous moron. People have a set of ideas about the nature of reality that constitutes a worldview. And atheistic worldviews don't particularly have a better track record than religious worldviews.

I don't really accept the idea that allowing abortion, contraception, or homosexuality are some litmus test for being good, either. Someone mentioned in the thread that Christians were unwilling to accept the Roman practice of exposing infants. Their attitude to abortion is from the exact same roots, they did not consider a human being not yet born differernt from any other human being, in the same way they did not consider one not yet accepted as a family member to be not a real person yet. Modern people may disagree but to suggest that's some obviously immoral stance is facile.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:04

JamieCannister · 28/09/2025 11:57

Do you believe that it's possible to be a catholic without believing in god?

Ofc not. But do you really see following the contraceptive laws as on the same level as believing in God- you reference the Pope, but we have many examples of recent Popes disagreeing with each other on important things. Francis is known to have been more liberal on birth control than Benefict, John Paul II or Paul VI, as well as other matters.

Or do you see him as a false Pope, and the others as the ones Catholics should follow?

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:05

JamieCannister · 28/09/2025 11:57

Do you believe that it's possible to be a catholic without believing in god?

Do you then see all the people disagreeing as not actually Catholic, then...?

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:08

JamieCannister · 28/09/2025 11:56

I can understand someone claiming to be a christian, and have an affinity with catholicism, and even to attend a catholic church because it is the most suitable nearby church... but to say "I'm a catholic who ignores some of what the Pope says because I'm right and he's wrong" seems a bit nonsensical.

There's plenty of examples of Popes being wrong in the past, including some pretty immoral ones (Alexandre Borgia, for one) ...do you then believe in Papal infallibility....?

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:13

TempestTost · 28/09/2025 11:57

There is no such thing as "just an atheist" unless we are speaking about a vacuous moron. People have a set of ideas about the nature of reality that constitutes a worldview. And atheistic worldviews don't particularly have a better track record than religious worldviews.

I don't really accept the idea that allowing abortion, contraception, or homosexuality are some litmus test for being good, either. Someone mentioned in the thread that Christians were unwilling to accept the Roman practice of exposing infants. Their attitude to abortion is from the exact same roots, they did not consider a human being not yet born differernt from any other human being, in the same way they did not consider one not yet accepted as a family member to be not a real person yet. Modern people may disagree but to suggest that's some obviously immoral stance is facile.

I know that position of the early Christians.

Ofc you can't judge a system as good just bc it allows those things. The Soviet Union decriminalised abortion & contraception for a while and that was hardly a moral system, for one.

For myself, I would judge a system more poorly if it forbade all of those- though I definitely think abortion should only be allowed up to 12 weeks. I don't know why the UK has a longer limit than most of Europe...

But ofc there are many other things a moral system should do.

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 12:19

Papal infallibility is confined to declarations made ex cathedra, of which there has been one (1) in the last nearly 2000 years - the assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (1950).

We are free to sin by disagreeing with the male dominated Church re sex in general and contraception in particular. Matters about taking life, including abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, are much more grave. Which brings up the question of women in poverty limiting their family size by infanticide, sometimes carried out by not feeding the baby. Well known in Ireland but not much written about.

Being poor sucks. At all times and in all places. Being poor and female brings extra horrors.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:25

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 12:19

Papal infallibility is confined to declarations made ex cathedra, of which there has been one (1) in the last nearly 2000 years - the assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (1950).

We are free to sin by disagreeing with the male dominated Church re sex in general and contraception in particular. Matters about taking life, including abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, are much more grave. Which brings up the question of women in poverty limiting their family size by infanticide, sometimes carried out by not feeding the baby. Well known in Ireland but not much written about.

Being poor sucks. At all times and in all places. Being poor and female brings extra horrors.

Thanks for the clarification! That makes a lot of sense. It's would be hard to demand absolute Papal infallibility when there's clear disagreements between Popes.

While I disagree with the Catholic line on abortion, I am grateful it takes a stance against euthanasia and death penalty.

That's truly horrible...I have read about somof cases of that happening... It's not something you think of happening so recently but ofc that's not true..
😢

Merrymouse · 28/09/2025 12:27

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 11:39

Yes,to some extent the Pill was legal from 1963. But that's not the full story.

It had to be marketed as a 'cycle regulator' to circumvent the ban. In 1979 it became legal for official family planning for married couples only. It was only in 1992 that unmarried women were officially able to buy the Pill.

Compare that the UK, where unmarried women could officially access the Pill from 1967. Or other Catholic countries for that matter : Spain and Italy both legalised in 1978 and 1971 and the former was just emerging from Franco, as we've said.

Wasn't access to the pill at the discretion of GPs and LAs until 1974 when family planning was incorporated in the the NHS? I wonder how much that was motivated by a drive towards administrative improvements and how much by ethical considerations.

The existence of the pill has certainly changed social attitudes to marriage and women's rights.

I wonder how much attitudes to sexuality and marriage are driven by pragmatic concerns and how much by religion?

In a society that depends on manual labour and the stability of the family unit to survive, homosexuality is a threat, and unmarried mothers are vulnerable. The flip side of the social pressure to have a shot gun marriage is the shame of being an unmarried mother and being a 'bastard'.

Will the decline in the birth rate also affect how society views marriage and sexuality?

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 12:31

I was in a convent school in Ireland in the mid 70s with a girl who was on the pill as a cycle regulator. A GP in the local market town was known for prescribing it, a pharmacist was prepared to dispense it. Women chose to live there. Check out when average family sizes began to drop.

Merrymouse · 28/09/2025 12:32

Which brings up the question of women in poverty limiting their family size by infanticide, sometimes carried out by not feeding the baby. Well known in Ireland but not much written about.

There is an episode of Call the Midwife where sister Julienne finds a new born baby affected by thalidomide left in the cold next to a hospital window to die more quickly. The implication is that this is normal practice, even in a hospital in the 1960s. Even allowing for some exaggeration for the benefit of drama, I suspect there is a grain of truth in it.

MusettasWaltz · 28/09/2025 12:41

DeanElderberry · 28/09/2025 12:31

I was in a convent school in Ireland in the mid 70s with a girl who was on the pill as a cycle regulator. A GP in the local market town was known for prescribing it, a pharmacist was prepared to dispense it. Women chose to live there. Check out when average family sizes began to drop.

Edited

Thank you, I appreciate that point - Ireland was more restrictive than other places but there were ways of getting round it.