Wings Over Scotland

At which point do they put guns at women’s heads and DEMAND they are politicians OR ELSE?

Deep down the Guardian also thinks NS is the most dangerous woman in the so-called united kingdom. [Good luck to Wales today, btw]

It’s not “the rough and tumble” that puts women off, but, for a great many who are not independently wealthy, balancing those parts of life which are generally,often necessarily, their responsibility would put off many from entering politics.

Quotas – well, few like them. Perhaps they would be more acceptable if fair quota policy wasn’t misrepresented or deliberately misunderstood. Merit should always be the winner.

O/T
If Only, news would be more interesting.

link to facebook.com

PMSL.

This idea of women only shortlists is something I am not in favour of as a means to achieving gender equality.

I have always believed in selecting the best person whether it be a man or woman.

Nicola’s logic makes complete sense to me.

Other people’s contrary views can often also make sense

Can we show a bit of respect both ways?

Thanks! “People say to me, ‘I don’t want quotas, I don’t want all women shortlists because I believe people should get on on merit’. I absolutely 100 per cent believe in that, I think people should get on on merit.

“The problem is that’s not what happens very often just now. If we had a system that was purely based on merit, we’d have gender balance because women are 52 per cent of the population, and unless you think that women are somehow less capable, then if we had a merit-based system we wouldn’t have these problems of under-representation of women.

“I do think we need to look at system-wide approaches to deal with that so we can one day get to a position where all of these decisions are entirely based on merit.”

In our SNP Branch we have over the years encouraged capable men and women to put themselves forward and to date we have a broadly gender balanced Branch Committee but our greatest difficuly is getting our large number of younger members male and female to get involved. Youngsters are all up for a cause like ‘The Referendum’ but getting them interested in the mundane day-to-day Branch business is another matter. On a personal level I have always believed and supported the ‘Best Person’ for the job but I recogise that women must be given more help with things like childcare, family friendly working hours etc.

Auld Rock

I think this explains it all..

link to youtube.com

Stars Jackie Baillie at 1:35… 🙂

I know this is an extremely contentious subject but I really don’t believe in quotas like this. I could understand it if women were putting themselves forward in equal numbers to men but being obviously overlooked, but I’m not convinced that is the case here.

I’m all for encouraging women into politics and then letting them compete on even playing field with men. The person selected to be a candidate should be the best person for the job. Not the one with the preferred chromosomal arrangement. It would be incredibly galling for some one to be told “you were easily the best choice, but I’m afraid the blithering idiot beside you who can barely string a sentence together has two X (or conversely, one Y) chromosome so they’re getting the job”.

A party’s list of candidates should idealy be proportional to the make up of those putting themselves forward (and not just in terms of gender) within statistical reason. If it doesn’t, the selection process may need checked for in-built bias. However, arbitrary quotas are not the answer. They are not fair or democratic.

I see both sides to this, and I sympathise deeply with those who profoundly disagree with the above policy, particularly when they are not, and never have been discriminatory.

As a female in her mid 40’s, working in a traditionally ‘male’ profession, my first thoughts on this were that it would be counter productive, and that it would undermine meritocracy.

Then I listened to the arguments, put forward by Nicola, that 50 % of the population is discriminated against, that the slow/gradual policy, is not working and has not worked over a very long period.

We are 50 % of the population now, the time for equality is now, not next week, not next year, not next decade.

I do not understand the argument that says, ‘its a good idea, and a just one, but just leave it be for a while, come back in 6 months and hopefully things will have changed.’

And here’s the thing, if we can get this right (or as right as humans ever do), its impact will go well beyond the target audience.

I was working in a small team, my boss and his second in command were getting very cocky and it was getting quite sexist. I asked them, ‘what’s the difference between an an ordinary sexist bastard, and one who’s thick as mince?’ They didn’t know, and eagerly wanted the answer. ‘The one who’s thick as mince has daughters.’ They both had daughters, of whom they were proud as punch, and believe it or not they were and are both brand new, just a bit sexist, but they want better for their daughters, and their sons.

So, I have a favour to ask, because this is the piece of the jigsaw I don’t see being filled. If you disagree with the above policy, if its the wrong tool for the job, will you analyse the problem, forensically, factually, will you look at the policies that do work, that partially work, that don’t work at all, will you lay them all out and highlight them. Or is the problem so indentured, that it is interwoven into our daily lives and can no longer be seen. Except in naked statistics.

Or perhaps things are ok as they are, perhaps making things a fairer for one group of people will ‘steal’ jobs from better qualified people…. yeh right, I’ve heard that one before somewhere, from the Tory conference.

As a child of 7 at school us girls decided we would like to play football. The boys kicked (not literally) us off the pitch and wouldn’t let us. We had a stand in teacher – a woman. When she heard about this, she made it clear that we could. For a whole year we got to play football, and we loved it. Then the old teacher came back and within a day and without any co-ordination or discussion, we were kicked off the pitch again. Laddies aged 7. They know their place, and they are not about to share it if they can get away with it. Be nice if they grew up.

Best wishes to all. One bit of decency at a time.

On the subject of fairness; J Corbyn came to Scotland yesterday to tell us what we have known for a long time about the unfairness of Tory cuts, and the devastating effects they are having on our society, and which Scottish Labour said, somehow magically, wouldn’t happen if ‘we’ voted No.

Right we need to make up the quota. Here is your shortlist:-
Kez, JaBa, Theresa May and Edwina.

It really could be very simple.
Have a male and a female candidate list in each constituency and elect one from each.

The National today, in its Editorial, says it should be a great source of pride that the leaders of the major parties in Scotland are all women, and whatever you may feel about them as politicians, it seems quite natural that women should occupy these posts.
I agree, and despite disliking a lot about the Tories and Slab, it has never occurred to me that their leaders should not be women.

UK politics is a mad house so quotas are essential. Women, can’t live with them but they’re everywhere, except politics.

The best incentive to get women into politics isn’t quota lists but strong role models like Nicola herself and younger women like Mhairi Black. Assertive, successful women who come across as real and familiar. This will break down prejudice and make politics an attractive option.

Margaret Thatcher is often cited in this context, but I think she did more to discourage women. She was such a grotesque, unnatural creation with her phoney voice and platinum hairdo, not to mention her hectoring persona. And she never trusted another woman enough to include them in her cabinet.

What to do, and Nicola on the front of the graun. I can just hear my unionist, and avid Saturday graun reading friends (female), in Northumberland snigger and say, ‘they are living in cloud cuckoo land as usual up there!’.

But really why are we having to even have this discussion it’s 2015. Of course we need a good balance but perhaps more importantly the political landscape should reflect society as a whole, ie
people from all backgrounds to have a chance in decision making politics.

With a few weeks training, many people would be well capable of taking on important roles in politics. I have a ‘cloud cuckoo’ vision that there would be a two year turn around for those sitting in the commons, not five with those sitting on their butts having no more qualification than having been to a posh school. I would also get rid of the royal family, and if people want a head of state, I would have a committee of people choosing someone from the community, who would do the job for a year, no palaces, no crown, just a wee flat in their own town, and they can go round doing good and waving if they want, and encouraging people to grow veg stuff like that. Each constituency would take their turn. :))

Crazy I know, but the way things are being done now is not conducive to a modern democracy, treating the population like school chidren, except of course in Scotland where the government actively encourage all of us to get involved, take part in consulations etc, but there’s me, being all ‘utopian’ again.

Equality and quotas don’t go together.

As for more women in politics…when I think of Thatcher, Dugdale, Baillie, Davidson, Curran et al, I just don’t think so.

The idea that women will make for better decision-making etc is a myth.

Capella, two wrongs don’t make a right. Punishing the innocents of the future for the guilty of the past will only cause division.

If candidates were selected on merit alone, there would tend to be a 50:50 gender split, and there isn’t. I’m not saying that evil selectors are skewing numbers for their own ends, more that a range of factors have an influence on who ends up holding public office, and quotas are one way of making up for that, albeit a top-down approach.

It’s a difficult question, but I do think it’s misleading to suggest that the choice is between quotas and merit selection – the quota is making up for factors which gravitate against merit selection, imo.

Things your Teachers said in Primary School:

Can the boys please slow down and let the girls catch up

Can the boys not play so rough remember girls can get hurt more easily

Can the boys each take one of the girls hands please

Can the girls stop talking please

Can the girls stop passing notes please

Can the boys stop climbing on things please

Can the girls leave the flowers where they are please

We’re different, we’re not equal, we’re not the same,

When women start talking men just want to get away, anywhere else but where they are

When men start talking women roll their eyes in the “OH dear God would you listen to him”

It’s time for men and women to stand up and be honest, the only time we’re interested in talking to each other is when there’s a risk of “Chemistry” the rest of the time neither gender could give a shit

We have very little regard for each others opinion but like to pretend that we do so we talk the PC talk and make the correct noises in the correct places until we can each turn away and forget the other even lives

This is the one policy I disagree with Nicola Sturgeon on
and it’s simple :

David Cameron thinks the FM is a pain
Nicola Sturgeon thinks the PM is a pain

Neither of the two of them can stand the other, he’s a Misogynistic Moron and a Mummies boy
While she’s (much as I like her) a pedantic misguided feminist

Now I know I’ve upset some folk, but I wont take it back because I’m sensitive and tough at the same time, but I can cry easily but not when folk are looking coz I’m tough

What even is equality and who gets to measure it

@Dr Jim

We see the same picture, just draw a completely different conclusion!

What is this “day off” thing you speak of?

Even when candidate quotas at 50/50, at the end of they day it is the SNP membership who finally elect their champions.

Me out of the candidate selections for an MP and an MSP, I selected a male and a female as I felt that they had the right credentials and broady agreed with what I believe in and not because of their sex.

Gender quotas can only be justified if gender equality amongst candidates is, in and of itself, a desirable thing. Can anyone explain to me why this would be desirable?

I would suggest that what is desirable is having the best policies effectively implemented in a democratic and accountable manner. Or in the case of opposition politicians, it is desirable that they scrutinise, constructively oppose and present alternatives. It may be that these genuinely desirable outcomes would be best achieved through gender balance, but if that is the case I don’t get it. A good policy, well implemented by a man is no better or worse than a good policy well implemented by a woman.

Gender quotas are in reality true sex discrimination in that gender is treated as paramount over all other qualities and traits. If these quotas are applied, it means that selection committees may be required to reject superior candidates (who happen to be male) because inferior candidates happen to be female and their selection will make up the quota. Is this really how we want to operate?

Targets on the other hand I think are acceptable. I can see no down side in saying “we want more women to become candidates, so we will encourage more women to enter the selection process”. But if that process, run on merit, gives say a 60:40 split in favour of one sex or the other, then so be it. The trouble with quotas, as opposed to targets, is that they mandate the outcome of the selection process. That is fundamentally undemocratic.

I’m not too keen on reading what The Guardian have to say about the ‘Women in The World’ conference I would ideally like to listen to the interviews.
I am on the look out to see if there is a recording of them anywhere. So far I have found

link to nytlive.nytimes.com

I posted a silly wee post earlier for a laugh and it was only posted to demonstrate differences that are immediate in folks heads when they hear words like equality and quotas

Seriously though, much though I’m in awe of Nicola Sturgeon (praise her name)and couldn’t for the life of me do what she does there’s one thing she can’t do

And that’s change or speed up evolution, it goes at the pace it goes, and to attempt to measure human qualities by comparing gender as any anthropologist will tell you is impossible

Humans are not cars or machines or even, (though some might wish it so), robots, we cannot fire a starting gun and say change by next Thursday at 10 o clock or we’ll fail to evolve

It’s a laudable ambition to have and a great Soundbite and political strategy but in order to make it a fact, you can’t
Because as a species we’re too young yet, we’ve not long, in evolutionary terms got started, we’re still not able to stop killing each other for money or land so how we’re supposed to change attitudes in a finger snap of time to suit that political Soundbite is unfortunately beyond us at this time

There are a thousand clever opinions on anything, so pick one and the other 999 will disagree or agree for the sake of another reason or are they lying, and it’s because we’re still not that far up the monkey chain yet

Except for Nicola (and I really do think she’s terrific)
But now you’re not sure if I’m lying, see what I mean

Women also face neo fascism opposition UKOK style that is quite different from what men do do-

link to theguardian.com

As toryboy world of counterjumpers pile in with stuff like-

Charlotte Church in rancid The Graun, “Dismissed by Michael Gove as “a comfortable millionaire spouting [her] opinion”, Church hit back that, as the child of a working class family who remains close to her Welsh roots, she certainly knew more “normal people” than him. Her own fortune – of which she says she around £3m remains rather than the often-reported £11m — doesn’t exclude her from campaigning on poverty, she insists: she would willingly pay 70% tax to a government committed to protecting public service”

So listening to just one more millionaire toryboy like Gove, also from a working class family and private school boy, fees all paid by taxpayer, usual teamGB hypocrisy, requires patience.

Meanwhile big angry red faced placemen and shills at BBC Scotland, spend their work day trying desperately to overturn Scottish democracy with their ongoing ferocious monstering of Michelle Thompson, based on what may well be nothing at all.

Strong stomach required, unless you’re tory. Then you become a great goddess of teamGB/BBC, for life

link to heraldscotland.com

Irony wise, if toryboy Mike Gove wanted to go to private school today, fees paid by taxpayer, it wouldn’t happen. Red tories Bomber Bliar and Crash Gordon scrapped all bursaries like the what Gove got almost immediately they won in 97.

Yet now, Mike Gove’s boys only old school Gordons College now allows girls.

Justin Kenrick @11.19 and Daisy Walker @11.32 put the case very well.

Those who argue against quotas because they are discriminatory and prevent people of merit being selected miss one crucial point. They would be right if selection was entirely on merit now. But it isn’t. Talented women are not selected and men of limited ability sometimes are. The reasons behind this are many, complex and often hidden in cultural conventions and stereotypes that are so ingrained we don’t notice them.

Some posters mention the barrier of women’s caring/domestic responsibilities. Why are these women’s responsibilities? Why are they not shared equally with men? I have long thought that greater gender equality in public and working life would be easier to achieve if there was greater domestic gender equality, particularly in relation to caring responsibilities.

The evidence from countries where quotas have been used is that they DO work. I have not heard anyone suggesting quotas should be a permanent fixture in Scotland. Instead they are proposed as a temporary solution. Other measures do not work or are too slow. However, once a reasonable gender balance is achieved (probably around 40% women), quotas can be withdrawn and other measures to encourage diversity should be enough to ensure an appropriate balance continues.

John Moss @12.31 says: “The idea that women will make for better decision-making etc is a myth.”

No it isn’t. In business, companies with women and men on their boards perform better financially. At other levels, mixed teams are better at solving problems and are more successful. Why would diversity in political life not be just as effective?

Unless you really believe that women are under represented at present because they are less capable, quotas are a reasonable, if blunt, short-term action to make sure women feature in public life in roughly equal numbers to their proportion in the population.

Bob Mack @ 1131 says:
Women have loads of ability,but perhaps the enthusiasm to engage in a life altering occupation ( for many reasons) is absent.

I’m a nurse(and a woman) and everyday, without fail, something happens which is some way is life altering. My enthusiasm remains, whilst I also run a home, take care of the kids and my partner and all the other things that go with it. I also study in my own time – not for extra money, but to benefit my role and my patients.

I think you would find that the majority of working women, whatever their remit have very demanding jobs and their occupation is part of their multifacted role – which is very demanding and life altering.

You try fitting all that running a house, kids and keeping a job going, keeping to a budget, etc and not having your life altered. The implication that many women lack the enthusiasm to take on a challenging career is way off. Perhaps it is lack of opportunity.

I find your comment ‘women have loads of ability’ slightly patronising.

yesindyref2 says:
10 October 2015 at 2:24 pm
@Rev
Nice. Attacking an SNP policy in public, you’ll get your bottie smacked 😉

yesindyref2 says:
9 October 2015 at 9:17 pm
@Valerie

And keep the personal snide remarks – to yourself, they have no place on a forum. Any forum.

Just saying yesindyref. Let it go. 🙂

So long as they do a good job,I don’t care whether they are male,female,or hermaphrodite.

Though hermaphrodite might be quite nice for a change.

My default position on female quota’s was like many others, “can’t be right”. “should be there on merit” etc. etc.

Funnily enough until around 3 years ago my default position on Independence was as a straight NO. The truth is I was ignorant about the possibilities that Independence offered, just as I am ignorant about the effectiveness of even the point of having female quotas in politics as well as in business.

So, just this afternoon I tried to learn a little more about them, where they are used, do they have any effect? are they democratic or antidemocratic? Well your not going to learn much in a couple of hours but what I have learned is enough for me to challenge my default position and accept I may have much to learn.

One example might help highlight what I mean.

Denmark, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have achieved high levels of women in parliament (37%, 47%, 40% and 41% respectively)

link to ec.europa.eu

Denmark interestingly has no quotas whatsoever, the other 3 countries have voluntary party quotas so there is no legislation involved. The only other EU country other than Denmark without quotas of any type is Ireland which has 14% of women in Parliament.

What is life like for the people living in those countries? So I looked at this:

“Quality of life in Europe – facts and views – overall life satisfaction”

and there was an interesting figure.

Life satisfaction from a cross country perspective

Figure 2 shows that the average life satisfaction varied significantly between countries, ranging from 4.8 in Bulgaria to 8.0 in Sweden, Denmark and Finland. Differences between countries in the share of people with low satisfaction were even more remarkable. They ranged from 5.6 % in the Netherlands to 64.2 % in Bulgaria. Proportions of people with high life satisfaction varied from 5.9 % in Bulgaria (followed by Hungary (11.6 %) and Latvia (12.6 %)) to 42.1 % in Denmark.

link to ec.europa.eu

Note how highly these 4 countries with a high proportion of women in Parliament score in terms of life satisfaction of their populous.

I know that if an Independent Scotland was governed much like Denmark, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands compared to the UK. I think I’d be a whole lot happier too.

Guess I best read a bit more.

I haven’t given much thought to whether I think

‘Quotas needed to help women enter politics’

If I were forced right now to say yes or no I think I would say no. I don’t like the idea of women or anyone else being ‘a protected species’ I don’t like all the PC correctness where you risk being accused of being sexist, racist, anti-English etc etc if you dare to criticise a person of a different race, sex or place of birth.

The behaviour of the mudslinging, vicious gossiping witch-hunting female Holyrood politicians are doing nothing to help convince people that we need to encourage more women to enter politics.

I can perfectly understand why men might be opposed to these quotas.

On another thread I criticised the ‘mudslinging witch-hunting vicious gossiping bitch trio’ and got a reply from

‘Brian Doonthetoon says:
9 October, 2015 at 11:02 pm

Hi Ruby.

I’m just relieved that it was a female of the opposite gender who typed that!

8=)’

I don’t think that is fair that I can say these things and ‘Brian Doonthetoon’ can’t for fear of being branded sexist or whatever it was that made him fear being hung drawn & thirded.

I’m so glad as yet males are not ‘a protected species’ and I am free to say whatever I like about them. However I suspect that things might change in future and if I dare to say nasty sexist things & use his toothbrush & face-cloth to clean the bath & toilet bowl I might have the police at my door.

I’m off to read why Nicola thinks it’s a good idea to have quotas so I might be back with a different point of view.

@otherdemons

Read my second post which clarifies your reaction to the first and attempts to make my point

My background was in Behavioural Analysis there’s no offence meant I promise you and regular posters on the site would tell you I’m not some horrible cave dweller growly man

@Daisy Walker says: 10 October, 2015 at 11:32 am:

” … I see both sides to this, and I sympathise deeply with those who profoundly disagree with the above policy, particularly when they are not, and never have been discriminatory.”

Like perhaps myself, Daisy. I spent 15 years as the union rep in a MOD Radio/Radar/Electronics workshop. This had several types of employment. Office Staff, Professional Industrial Civil Service Diagnosticians, Industrial Technical Tradespeople and skilled+unskilled Labourers.

There was, though, grey areas between the several grades and as the only resident Union/Professional Association rep I fell heir to doing most of the representation and such as safety walk-rounds for the entire non-management workforce.

Then a problem arose among the skilled/unskilled labour force of gender equality. Not my Union but the other Union Reps just sloped shoulders and left it to me. The problem was that the Skilled/unskilled labour force were to undergo a re-grading exercise to cut the number of pay grades.

Most females had been doing cleaning duties while males had jobs like overhead crane driver, slingers, electro-plate machine operators. If they were all to get graded the men felt they were entitled to the top grade and the females were just skivvies to clean.

War broke out and I was in no man/ no woman’s land between the two. It went like this – I sat the men down and listened to their POV. Then did the same with the Ladies. Then sat them all down together. My solution was if they were all wanting on the higher grade then they must all agree to undertake the same duties. The ladies had to shift heavy gear and the men to push brooms.

The obvious happened. However, I had taken the chance to take one of the ladies aside and inform her that the moving of heavy gear around should not be done by brute force as the rules stated no one should attempt to lift anything they considered too heavy for themselves to lift but that courses were available to learn how to use the many neglected lifting aids and the ladies could be on the higher rate and use the proper equipment.

The result was that the ladies learned to do the heavy work and the men went on complaining about having to sweep floors. Then the more delicate ladies removed themselves from the heavy work, (not because they couldn’t cope but because they couldn’t be bothered with the more thick headed men sneering at them for using the correct gear instead of brute force).

Next up the Brute force guys applied for jobs elsewhere in the yard where they could show off their brute force and bicepts. Peace broke out.

There, Daisy, is the answer. Teach both males and females there are more ways to skin cats and some are better suited to use each method. It does, though, require that both see the others strength and weakness.

Dr Jim at 1:08pm

“When men start talking women roll their eyes in the ‘OH dear God would you listen to him'”

As expertly demonstrated by Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall when it was Jeremy Corbyn’s turn to speak at Labour Party leadership hustings.

I called it their “Oh you sad, pathetic little man” face.

Strangely it vanished, to be replaced by sunny smiles and batting eyelashes, on the day Corbyn was elected leader.

Dr Jim: yes I did read your further comment, after posting my first reply.
Still not sure about the evolutionary comment – why is the UK so far behind Scandinavia and other European countries eg.? Does the ‘Establishment’ shape the views of the populace so much? Is it because consumerism has a stronger hold (the example of blue/pink boys/girls clothes/toys etc – limits the number of items that can be passed down a sibling to another).
I can agree that imposing some ideas too quickly isn’t a good thing. Like the concept of borders and nation states in regions where they never existed. But that’s another matter entirely.

I find it a bit odd that some men get so angry about perceived discrimination against them but don’t seem to mind about the discrimination that affects the other, roughly, 50% of the population. Women have been discriminated against for thousands of years and despite all attempts to the contrary, women are still being discriminated against.

For instance, many men will have got a job when there was a better female candidate but the bosses didn’t want to hire someone who could get pregnant; many men will have been paid more than their female colleagues for doing precisely the same job, etc. etc. I can’t ever remember hearing a man talk about merit and fairness when those things happen to a woman so it seems a bit hypocritical that some men feel it’s so important now, especially when that’s all women have ever asked for and have never received.

I’m not fond of quotas personally and it’s a shame that it’s had to come to this but the inequality must be addressed. Nothing else seems to have worked so as a temporary measure to get the ball rolling, I think it’s something we should at least try. If anyone had a better idea, I’d be all ears but I haven’t heard any so far. I think the real difference would come if we could also address some of the other inequalities such as equal pay, men doing their equal share of the child-rearing and housework, changing attitudes towards women, etc. Then we might have a truly equal, fair society where these kinds of measures aren’t needed and we will have a true meritocracy.

Ruby@2.59pm

I advise online grocery shopping, even if I had a car I would not waste my time walking round a big supermarket, well maybe just occassionaly to use the loos.

Also, the guys delivering the shopping are always lovely and charming, it’s never a woman, which seems a bit strange. Looks like bloody hard work, but doable by any strong woman and they do exist. :))

Much prefer gardening to housework, and art. Chores should be shared, like good chocolate.

To a certain extent, by the time it gets to Quotas, its too late, the damage is done and it is the end of a long chain of systems that have funnelled people with potential away.

An example, I joined the SNP after the ref, I sent out e-mails asking members what inspired them and what they wanted from the branch. One young woman (amongst others) answered, she very much wanted to contribute and be active, however, as a single mother she absolutely could not make the branch meetings because they are held in the evenings. During the day her parents child mind while she works, so in the evenings its her shift.

I put this to the committee, several times, and suggested every second meet be on a Saturday morning in a local child friendly venue…. no go.

What a waste, not just in terms of one contributor, but in terms of all the other young mums/people she socialises with (and can educate), in terms of her life and work experience, and the practical experience of raising a young child today, as apposed to 10, 15, 20 years ago.

I hold that the benefits in equality for one group, make space for and reality for equality for all.

Another example – a business leader in America took over the running of a very large steal works, financially it had seen better days and badly needed turning around. At his first shareholders meeting, he had one idea. This company was going to be the safest place to work, ever. Needless to say, the shareholders couldn’t see that improving the profits and walked out in disgust.
However, he meant it. He meant it so much if an accident happened at work and was not properly reported – and then analysed so it would not happen again – he gave out his home phone number – to the workers. And when they took him up on it, he backed them, even going so far as to sack a MD of one of the factories. And then he encouraged them to suggest efficiency improvements, and by now they had a direct line… and low and behold, the company started making huge improvements, in moral, in profit, in efficiency, and yes, in safety.

Just the one policy.

I say again, Quotas may very well be the wrong tool for the job, but where are the cries of outrage at the status quo. It is not normal, it is engineered, and it can be rectified.

@ Dr Jim

Your second post did not mitigate the first one, but, then again, I’m busy trying to evolve to catch up with men.

That’s without even considering views on quotas.

@otherdemons

Hi, In my humble opinion Britain’s problems as you say are worse than some others and I think due to Education and Trust

Our population over the last few years has gotten smarter so our trust in what our so called Politicians have told us in the past has been diminished due mostly to the fact we don’t like being lied to and we keep catching them at it

Britain has been told for a very long time that we’re right about everything while other countries, not all but certainly more have had a different political culture like the ones you mention

To set your heart on copying the American style of Culture which was originally Bastardised from our own was, and is a hideous idea but we knew no better and went along with it because when a people is continually told they’re the Bestest and the greatest on the planet, what’s not to believe

Thing is, now we know they’re a lying bunch of Toe rags and it’s not true, so we’re running around trying to find ourselves and coming to the conclusion that we rather like the Scandywegian idea of life where the name on your trainers isn’t quite as important as the consumery idea we were used to being sold

But, we’re angry, Politicians, Priests, Journalists, our Telly for God sake, they’ve all been at it, feeding us junk and we didn’t know it, and there’s an element of feeling stupid because we were conned and manipulated by it all

Nicola Sturgeon at this moment in time is for Scotland Joan Of Arc, Boadicia, Cleopatra whichever famous type woman from history seen as a saviour and the thing is we all know she just might be, so we stand behind her in the hope she can deliver us from the evil that grips us

So when she comes up with an idea for something, even if we have reservations, we say you know what I’m backing her whatever (and I’m one of those) but it doesn’t mean she’s right, but for now I for one don’t much care about that because the big picture for me is more important than a Quota here or there,

Nicola Sturgeon is the only hope in getting us out of a terrible alliance with a badly run for profit Government of a badly run for profit Disunited Kingdom

I looked into her eyes when she spoke to me (for thirty seconds mind) we’re not Buddies, and I believed she’s got the stuff to do it

Just my humble opinion

John Moss

The idea that women will make for better decision-making etc is a myth.

What is “better” decision making and which cultural lens are you viewing the evidence through? Male and female brains are structured differently, so men and women think differently. Different may be better.

For the first time we can look across the vast literature and confirm that brain size and structure are different in males and females. – Amber Ruigrok

This study was supported by the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, the Autism Research Trust, the Dr Hendrik Müller Vaderlandsch Fonds, the Carolus Magnus Fonds under the Prins Bernard Cultuurfonds, and the Waterloo Foundation. It was conducted in association with the NIHR CLAHRC for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust.

link to cam.ac.uk

Sometime you need be ridiculous to indicate just how ridiculous another matter really is. Here’s a take on that.

Why must we have either Tory or Labour Governments at Westminster? Why not a constituency list of, say, Labour only candidates in 50% of the constituencies so as not to discriminate against the Red Tories?

Then we could split that down again to male only lists to 50% constituencies and then split that down so as not to exclude gays but what about the old and the young. Et Al.

Is not the whole point of governance to get the best party that the electorate wants and nothing whatsoever to do with their party, sex, age or anything other than what, THE VOTERS want and not what the political parties want?

…. The problem is that’s not what happens very often just now. If we had a system that was purely based on merit, we’d have gender balance because women are 52 per cent of the population….

That’s just not true.

It’s a simple fact that some professions and occupations are more attractive to women, and some less. If you have a system based purely on merit, and the average merit of male and female applicants is equivalent, then you will end up with a gender balance that reflects the gender distribution in the applicant pool.

In the first half of the 20th century, almost all vets were male. This was a result of discrimination in university entrance criteria. If you were female, you had to be extraordinarily good to get in. Knowledge of this hurdle deterred some girls from applying, of course.

Gradually the discrimination was reduced and lifted. More and more girls gained places at university to study veterinary medicine. My own class in the 1970s was the first to be equal 50/50 male/female. The Dean made a little speech to us saying that a positive decision had been taken to stop sidelining 50% of the school-leaving talent. We thought that was that, 50/50 from now on.

How wrong we were. It’s more like 20/80 now. The vast majority of new veterinary graduates are female. Why, when women are only 52% of the population? Because women turn out to be disproportionately attracted to working with animals. The universities are receiving applications for places in the veterinary courses skewed 4 to 1 in favour of women. So, since the selection procedures are gender-blind, 80% of the intake are female.

Should we introduce quotas now to achieve a 50% male intake and stop disadvantaging these poor boys? That’s a question for a different forum. But it illustrates the point. Left to themselves, people don’t pursue careers in a natural 50/50 gender split.

It seems that men tend to pursue a career in politics more readily than women do. Yes, we need to make sure selection procedures are gender-blind. Yes, we need to work to ensure that a “boys’ club” culture doesn’t deter women from entering politics. But at the end of the day, if only 35-40% of applicants are female and the quality profile is equivalent between men and women, we’ll end up with only 35-40% of politicians being women.

What are you going to do? Promote less capable women over more capable men to make your bloody quota? (Why would we admit less capable boys to vet school in preference to more capable girls, just to balance a quota?) Conscript and dragoon women who want to be vets or teachers or beauty therapists into politics against their will?

This is all a very bad idea, but I’m certainly not leaving the SNP over it.

As a man, I believe in positive discrimination for women. Especially in the case of the campaign for Scottish indy, because our women are so damned good!

I can understand why women want to make it on their own merits. But I do think that positive discrimination is needed to balance out things, including the deficiencies of the past.

What I do not like is the idea of Nicola Sturgeon sharing a platform with Theresa May! Neither do I like NS’s silly tweets bigging up Hillary Clinton. Rather naive.

Hardly role models for OUR wonderful women of the YES movement, I would think…

Morag, you cant really compare the vet profession and Holyrood, in any way. Vets are competing for a tiny number of places and so are prospective MSP’s but not on how many Highers they get. If that makes sense.

Or, a great vet and a great MSP are two very different er, trades.

So,with team britian not in this tourney,England failing at the first hurdle,and Scotland going through,is this the time to ask who will you support in the world cup. Popcorn at the ready…

@K1 “let it go”

When I find myself in times of trouble
K1 and Paula come to me
Speaking words of wisdom, let it go

Let it go, let it go
Let it go, let it go
Whisper words of wisdom
Let it go

Quarter-finals, here here here we go

What a strange week, and what a cast of victims:

link to grousebeater.wordpress.com

otherdemons
Apparently the Romans were appalled by the rights enjoyed by Celtic women and women in many of Europe’s pagan cultures. Then Europe turned Christian and pagan cultures were suppressed by a cargo-cult of patriarchal Catholic monism. The rest is history. 🙂

When you have no answer or position you are sure of Just Insult people
Or in the time it takes to read the paragraph of a book change a lifetime of opinion in a moment then back again the next day

A culture change takes a little longer

Read this for Scottish Cringe, from the Herald:

“SCOTLAND’s hopes of reaching the quarter-finals of the Rugby World Cup were in the balance until the very end of this Pool B contest, but they just about deserved to go through thanks to a much-improved second half. ”

(my bold) Get a life.

OT Carmichael in court on Monday apparently.

Presumably everyone who will be called as a witness will wondering what will be asked!

And, who will be called?

A reminder. Those four folks driving this have my admiration!

link to indiegogo.com

So maybe there should be no interference in professions.

@Betty Boop
Had I been at that last conference say as a delegate, I would have voted violently against it. Now I’m not so sure.

If I had to vote for it next appropriate conference, I’ve no idea which way I’d vote.

Dave the Spiv: Cronyism and nepotism is rife in the SNP. No one can deny this is true.

If there’s a prize involved I’m happy to deny it.

Once again I see a lot of misguided feminists completely missing the point.

Their problem is not their perceived one of gender, but one of class.

If they think quotas will make for greater opportunity for them, they are sadly mistaken.

It may mean greater opportunity for middle class and above women (though I doubt it, the opportunity was always there they just didn’t want it), but not for the hoi polloi.

What it will actually mean is that many talented working class men who are already up against it will be denied completely. They will suffer due to class and sex discrimination. Meanwhile their talented working class spouses will be equally denied though they will have the false hope of a quota.

Quotas are not the answer. The answer to more women in politics is encouraging more to be interested. If they are not interested, then so be it.

Because this isn’t the fairer, better, equal Scotland we’re fighting for.

I just got out of a huge, serious situation that could have jeopardised my personal and private reputation because somebody presumed to use “we” when he really meant “I.” You run Wings Over Scotland, but is this “we” as in you, or “we” as in you, Scott Minto, Andrew Leslie, Doug Daniel, and all the other contributors? That’s the problem with use of collective “we.”

Don’t fight for the Scotland you disagree with. Fight for the Scotland which is decided by its people. Fight for the Scotland which can choose what kind of country it wants to be for itself. Fight for a Scotland that isn’t run by paedophile-enabling war-profiteering poor-oppressing soul-destroying incompetent lunatics being aided and abetted by compliant media, business oligarchs and establishment cabals.

Ultimately, we’re all fighting for a slightly different Scotland. Some are fighting for a socialist republic; others a Scandinavian-style democracy; still others want to keep it much like it is now. But all are united in believing that it should be Scots who decide how the country is going to be run.

Enjoy your day off.

Truth at 5.52

It’s not “the hoi polloi”, it’s “hoi polloi”. “Hoi” in ancient Greece is the equivalent of “the”.

In today’s world you are what class you want to behave as.
Do you perhaps mean those with no abilities, objectives or ambition. They are classless

Quotas are baaad mkay
link to youtube.com

OT
Dipped into the murky depths of the DT last night and today, about the infamous higher maths question, and if anyone wanted a reason for Independence, the general tone of the comments would do it.

But I was struck by this reply from someone to presumably a regular:

“England: Do you want to run your own country Jock?
Jocks: Naw, you just keep giving us English money and we’ll keep complaining about the SNP.”

Yesindyref2:

I hope you win the lottery too, I also hope you’d share it with the rest of us! 😉 I hope that we can get rid of discrimination against women in my life time. I’m not a fan of quotas but as nothing else seems to have worked and no-one else seems to have any better ideas, I think we’re at the scraping the bottom of the barrel stage. Since we need to do something about it, then let’s at least give it a go and see if it makes a difference.

I hope it does work, but I doubt it; I think gender discrimination runs far deeper and to solve it we therefore need to change attitudes at a far deeper level. But, maybe if people can see and get used to women being at the top levels of politics, it might roll down so to speak, and make a real difference not only in women’s willingness to get involved in politics but also in terms of work-life and home-life, etc.

While we’re talking about discrimination, I’d also like to see us working on equal representation for people from all socio-economic backgrounds in politics. I’d also like to see men not be afraid to take their full paternity leave for fear of being seen as “not a company man” and therefore ripe for redundancy, etc. etc. This is a start, many people may feel it’s a shit start, maybe it is, but nothing else has got through. Let’s at least try. If it doesn’t work, I’d be the first person to want it stopped; there’s no point in exchanging one unfairness for another. But we can’t claim to be a progressive society when there is so much institutionalised unfairness so we need to try.

@Yesindyref2

The DT Dads?

I hope you had your shots before dipping in there. 🙂

I used to visit and post on there a few years back…

… I still have the nightmares.

Barking bonkers for the most part.

In retrospect, I might’ve been a bit saltier in my earlier post than I meant to. I think we’re all feeling some residual frustration and grumpiness regarding the sports events, even if we don’t follow sport.

Think I’ll take a break too.

@ Robert Louis

It’s great not to hear that phrase “Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory”
I’m not a rugby guy, but who cares, we won at something that’ll do for me

@ yesindyref2, 5:49pm

@Betty Boop
Had I been at that last conference say as a delegate, I would have voted violently against it. Now I’m not so sure.

If I had to vote for it next appropriate conference, I’ve no idea which way I’d vote.

The advantage of being at the conference is that you can listen to the entire debate. This one was the longest of the last conference. Well argued on both sides.

If it came up at conference again, I don’t know which way I would vote and that is the point. It is intended for this election only to encourage branches to give women a hearing, otherwise it might never have happened.

Just a little dip back in..

The last time this was debated on here it became so heated with some verging on the aggressive.

This time though feels less antagonistic and I wonder if folk have had more time to consider the possibilities and decided it may not be such a bad idea after all!

Carry on as you were…:D

If Nicola Sturgeon and a majority of other women in the SNP are in favour of quotas then I support that point of view.

@Kirsty
The amount of misogyny I still see around, e.g. forums, is frightening. Not talking about here, I don’t think any comments were misogynystic, just humorous!

It does seem to be more us old ones, so I guess it’ll die out in a generation or so. The young people I meet seem to be nearly bereft of it, not even really “woman driver”. No wonder about the last one by the way, I was struck and dismayed (as a mere man) in the naughties that the faster and more confident drivers seemed to be young women. Maybe that’s just where I live.

@Betty Boop
Yes, it has aired the issue more, and probably at least made SNP members think and perhaps change their minds.

Cadogan Enright
We live and learn, hopefully. 😉

Bring on Australia… I love their national anthem.. 😀

link to youtube.com

I agree mogabee, compared to the last outing of this subject on Wings, this has been very mature today…it’s very heartening…

I don’t generally watch sport, ‘cept tennis occasionally, but I’m delighted for our rugby team in getting through to the QF’s, good on them. I hope we thrash Australia (I know, terribly partisan of me), if only to wipe the smugness off the faces of some of the commenters from under some Guardian articles on the Scotland result today. That would be a ‘satisfying’ win for me… 😉

Ah rugby again. Unsung hero, shhh, someone who could have been yellow-carded for preventing a possible end to end touchline try with a deliberate knock-on, shhh, not telling you who. Don’t tell then your name Hogg.

@ Ruby, 5:58pm
Did you order the wine with your home delivered meal? 🙂 enjoy!

@ mogabee, 7:48pm
Agreed. Compared to the last time, this is a good discussion.

@ Dr Jim, 7:11pm
Correct, we all have differing views and are willing to debate. As commented to mogabee, enjoying the discussion – must be evolving, eh?

@Thepnr, 2:11pm
I’m proud of you ;-), always willing to re-consider your opinions. Respect.

@Truth
I see no “misguided feminists” here.

Croompenstein at 8.16

Actually the w*nkers chose the pompous and boring “Rise Australia Fair” (which had the same tune as the Nigerian national anthem at that time) instead of Waltzing Matilda. I’ve had little time for Australians since.

29% in Westminister,35% at Holyrood. The stats speak for themselves,we have to take positive action, temporarily, to address this.

or “feminazi”

Ze towzel zat iz juzt obeying orderzzz.. 🙂

Davy says:
10 October, 2015 at 5:42 pm
It dosent matter what sex they are. They will only get a job if there mates or family are in the party. Cronyism and nepotism is rife in the SNP. No one can deny this is true.

Hi Davy, are you giving us a newsroom listen in on today’s BBC Scotland news brainstorming sessions, chaired by Glenn “weird voice” Campbell?

Its a serious question Davy. I’m not kidding but I really wish I was.

@Daisy Walker 3.37

Excellent post – in such a culture quotas might be less needed.