Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Legislating for Inequality

Just been reading the Labour Manifesto (i know, i know . .) and several parts have fairly irked me.

Labour Manifesto: http://www.labour.org.uk/manifesto (other Manifesto's are available).

In particular, there seems to be some requirement to legislate purely for Women in terms of pay discrimination and domestic violence/Sexual offences.

Now, I agree that these things need to be prevented and justice prevail - but I cant help but wonder why we are 1. Not using existing non-gender specific laws that already exist and 2. creating prejudices positively discriminating in favour of a particular gender.

Mankind (www.mankind.org.uk) as an example, provide stats that of the c80k rapes, 9,000 victims are male. And around 1 in 3 Domestic violence victims are male (which I imagine the real figures are much higher since there is more stigma attached to being a bloke reporting that his missus beats him up).

There is also much concern that male refuge centres and support services are practically non-existent, yet various Parties are only promising more support to womens support services.

We will publish a Violence against Women and Girls Bill, appoint a commissioner
to set minimum standards in tackling domestic and sexual violence, and provide

more stable central funding for women’s refuges and Rape Crisis Centres.

The independent also ran an interesting article on it http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ficult-to-say-ive-been-beaten-up-8572143.html.

Next,

In terms of the mythical 'gender-pay-gap' - even the ONS concedes that women from 20 - 40 are paid more than men, on average.

The gap is relatively small up to, and including, the 30-39 age group (with the exception of the 16-17 age group). In fact, the gap is negative for the 22-29 and 30-39 age groups, meaning that women earn on average more than men. Thereafter, there is a relatively large positive gap. (http://www.equalpayportal.co.uk/statistics/) - using ONS 2014 figures.

So I guess my questions are:-

1. Why are we peddling such one-sided agenda driven drivel - when we should be addressing equality for all?
2. Wheres the support for blokes - since we are now supposedly all equal?
3. When will this Feminist-agenda nightmare ever end (all you see on telly now is how wonderful women are all the f****** time . . .)
 
It is all noise generated to try and illustrate that politicians are concerned with what are seen as "low hanging fruit" in terms of votes.
What really hacks me off is that we already have a pretty well stuffed book of statutes, so they should perhaps be having a look at the laws already on the books and highlighting them, instead of passing more ill-considered, barely thought-through, knee-jerk populist crap.
/endrant
 
The less educated, lower sectors have simplistic minds that tend to focus on easy triggers to rapid indignation and very simple solutions...that are not always the best answers.
 
The wage statistics for 22-39 aren't indicative of whole-life earnings which I'd expect to be on average lower for women than men owing to child-related factors and earlier retirement.

I'd agree that there should be more emphasis on making the existing laws work for all victims of abuse based on their being victims of abuse rather than women. There's certainly a sense that blokes are less effected by female-on-male aggression, which I don't reckon is the case. It is, however, demonstrably true that more women die at the hands of partners than men - it would be interesting from an analytic perspective to see corresponding figures from male-homosexual relationships to see how much of a factor male-abuser is compared to strength-disparity.
 
- it would be interesting from an analytic perspective to see corresponding figures from male-homosexual relationships to see how much of a factor male-abuser is compared to strength-disparity.

Physical size wouldn't necessarily be a driving factor in any kind of DV scenario - although it always could be. It's simply based around one partner thinking it's OK to lash out and the other not.

Most men wouldn't be physically afraid of a female partner. It doesn't work like that. It works around women feeling backed up by police - able to continually up the anti without fear of reprisal and oftentimes, they are proved right.

Have a watch of this.

 
Physical size wouldn't necessarily be a driving factor in any kind of DV scenario - although it always could be.
I was thinking solely in terms of the damage caused. A beating from a man is likely to cause more damage, all else being equal, than a beating from a woman, which may influence the decision to make a formal complaint - "It wasn't that bad 'coz I'm hardly marked"/" Nobody will believe me 'coz I'm hardly marked", etc.
 
Try it when she is using a high heeled shoe. There have been a few, with males involved, where the worst damage was inflicted by the female.
 
Try it when she is using a high heeled shoe. There have been a few, with males involved, where the worst damage was inflicted by the female.
Yeah, but "all else being equal" means that a man using a high-heeled shoe will typically inflict more damage on the target than a woman can.
 
Yes, lots of men wearing them.

Clean your glasses; and I thought carrots made you see better.
A man with a shotgun can inflict more damage than a woman without one. What does that have to do with it?

You're not trying to argue that if you give a woman and a man the same brute-force implements then the woman will inflict more damage than the typically-stronger man?
 
A man with a shotgun can inflict more damage than a woman without one. What does that have to do with it?

You're not trying to argue that if you give a woman and a man the same brute-force implements then the woman will inflict more damage than the typically-stronger man?

It's not so much about 'the punch' or 'the kick' though. I very much doubt that any husband lives in the same kind of fear that some wives do.

Women are much more likely to go in for the kind of DV that involves throwing things and attacking people in such a way as is not really likely to cause physical harm, but does cause the kind of chaos that brings police to the door - whereby she'll greet them as the victim, knowing they'll probably buy it.

But, according to the wimmin's groups, it's DV. No two ways about it.
 
Top