More unfairness for males
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Ray in Houston  Houston 10 Oct 17 4.27pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
You cut me off because there are numerous obvious examples where we have equality without fairness. Your point about Hawking is a huge strawman. You obviously don't like it when the facts hurt your feelings.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Stuk  Top half 10 Oct 17 4.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
The men do get a match fee of around £1,500 or they did a few years back. Not sure if that has changed. It all gets given to charity. The men's team take home no money.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Oct 17 4.41pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
You said, there needed to be equality before there can be fairness. I showed you a very obvious example where equality flies in the very face of fairness. Rousy is a great example of someone earning what they are worth and doing well. She gets paid on her commercial value. Hawking has nothing to do with any point at all. He is an example of meritocracy. What have I said that somehow is against Hawking doing well? It just comes across as cognitive dissonance to me. I can go onto other examples of unfairness towards males, ranging from circumcision to taxes and family courts to sentences for the same crimes. I think tackling one issue at a time is better than throwing everything at the wall at the same time. Let's start with the law on male and female circumcision. Female circumcision outlawed, male circumcision legal. How is this fair? Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Oct 2017 4.42pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Ray in Houston Houston 10 Oct 17 4.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
It all gets given to charity. The men's team take home no money. It used to be that playing for the national team was the only way to showcase yourself to get sponsorships and lucrative transfers. Now, wall-to-wall TV coverage of league games does that, so playing for your country has become - for many - a chore that takes away from, and potentially threatens, their money-spinning club career. Yet another thing about football that has been destroyed by the Premier League. It came into being in 1992; England's last good showing at an international tournament was Italia '90. Coincidence?
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Ray in Houston Houston 10 Oct 17 4.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
You said, there needed to be equality before there can be fairness. I showed you a very obvious example where equality flies in the very face of fairness. Rousy is a great example of someone earning what they are worth and doing well. She gets paid on her commercial value. Hawking has nothing to do with any point at all. He is an example of meritocracy. What have I said that somehow is against Hawking doing well? It just comes across as cognitive dissonance to me. I can go onto other examples of unfairness towards males, ranging from circumcision to taxes and family courts to sentences for the same crimes. I think tackling one issue at a time is better than throwing everything at the wall at the same time. Let's start with the law on male and female circumcision. Female circumcision outlawed, male circumcision legal. How is this fair?
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 10 Oct 17 4.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
It used to be that playing for the national team was the only way to showcase yourself to get sponsorships and lucrative transfers. Now, wall-to-wall TV coverage of league games does that, so playing for your country has become - for many - a chore that takes away from, and potentially threatens, their money-spinning club career. Yet another thing about football that has been destroyed by the Premier League. It came into being in 1992; England's last good showing at an international tournament was Italia '90. Coincidence? I'm not sure I agree. To use a Palace player as an example, we paid £1m (a then record) for Nigel Martyn in 1989 when he had no England caps and was playing the 3rd division. 1996 was the last decent showing also, albeit with home advantage.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Oct 17 4.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Female circumcision is medically unnecessary; male circumcision has known medical benefits. It's one of the reasons I opted to have it done as an adult. ? I'm not even going to argue with you on that....you believe what you want and you voluntarily getting circumcised as an adult is not an issue. What I will say is that while male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons early on....this is rare. There is no excuse for male circumcision being performed on babies......none. It is barbaric....religious or cultural. So outside of rare medical reasons, there is no excuse for the unfairness of allowing infant male circumcision and banning infant female circumcision. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Oct 2017 4.55pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Michaelawt85 Bexley 10 Oct 17 4.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
? I'm not even going to argue with you on that....you believe what you want and you voluntarily getting circumcised as an adult is not an issue. What I will say is that while male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons early on....this is rare. There is no excuse for male circumcision being performed on babies......none. It is barbaric....religious or cultural. So outside of rare medical reasons, there is no excuse for the unfairness of allowing infant male circumcision and banning infant female circumcision. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Oct 2017 4.55pm) Totally agree. Wouldn't know whether a boy or man needed a circumcision for medical reasons until they were older. Not a couple of days old whilst awake without the use of a proper anaesthetic and outside of a hospital or medical setting. f***ing barbaric. The pain must be indescribable
When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 10 Oct 17 4.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
? I'm not even going to argue with you on that....you believe what you want and you voluntarily getting circumcised as an adult is not an issue. What I will say is that while male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons early on....this is rare. There is no excuse for male circumcision being performed on babies......none. It is barbaric....religious or cultural. So outside of rare medical reasons, there is no excuse for the unfairness of allowing infant male circumcision and banning infant female circumcision. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Oct 2017 4.55pm) Anti Semite.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Oct 17 5.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Strawman situation construction. If you hold something important from me and my partner and I pay you and require you to release it only with both our consent and then you just give it to her without being in contact with me then you are negligent. You bare some responsibility. I don't think that's how the contract is set up though, effectively its more that you and your partner have engaged them to provide certain services(presumably fertility services). Now I think its a bit odd that only a signature is required - but if contractually all that's required is a signature - which seems to be the case - then it would be 'reasonable' to assume they discharged their legal obligations under the contract - and that they're not required to verify the signature of consent to any real degree (i.e. if it looks like his signature that's on file, that's enough). Consent for implantation I would imagine is inherent in the engagement of the service (as these were inseminated embryos with both parties biological materials) with the two parties. Maybe its not uncommon for people to turn up with signed consent only for implantation. Also there is a question of reality of damages - Does he have to pay for the support of the child? What emotional or mental damage was suffered? Was there any material loss (probably not, as the material stored has no resale value, and the only other option would be to destroy the material).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Ray in Houston Houston 10 Oct 17 5.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I'm not even going to argue with you on that....you believe what you want and you voluntarily getting circumcised as an adult is not an issue. What I will say is that while male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons early on....this is rare. There is no excuse for male circumcision being performed on babies......none. It is barbaric....religious or cultural. So outside of rare medical reasons, there is no excuse for the unfairness of allowing infant male circumcision and banning infant female circumcision.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Oct 17 5.03pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Michaelawt85
Totally agree. Wouldn't know whether a boy or man needed a circumcision for medical reasons until they were older. Not a couple of days old whilst awake without the use of a proper anaesthetic and outside of a hospital or medical setting. f***ing barbaric. The pain must be indescribable Unlike their crazy gun laws...which you know are never going to change much.... you'd at least hope that this great country could at least come to its senses on this utterly ridiculous practice. Apparently the trends are slowly changing.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.