Vocal Voices

Reading that the SNP has now agreed to all women shortlists, I've decided that I'm getting a little sick of all this "affirmative action" going on.

Let's look at it this way. Today we are told that we must have as many women as men on boards, equal numbers of women in parliament, in fact equal numbers of men an women pretty much everywhere.

Then again, I wonder, why don't we have male nuns? It's equal right?

NO, in fact it's absolutely idiotic.

So let's see where our "50:50" women in parliament goes. We know for a fact that there are roughly three men for every woman who wants to be in politics.

So if we demand that half of parliament must be women, then every woman man has a 3* better chance of winding up in parliament than every man.

And we call this fair?

What idiot thought of this as fair? Which part of twisted PC politics makes this kind of thing fair? Yes there are seats where a woman will naturally be better suited than a man. But half of them??

I have a daughter who is the best in her department. She's got all the skills, all the knowledge, all the ability and she was offered the job of director on a plate.

Why isn't she director?

She doesn't want to be, she turned it down, flat, without a second thought. She doesn't want the pressure, the responsibility or the time away from her family.

So, if the best don't want to do it and we have a "quota" policy, what are we going to get?

So in a multi-culti, multi-faith, multi-lifestyle society where will it all end? Quotas for Sikhs, Moslems, Atheists, others for Africans, Poles, Asians, others for LGBT, more for African atheist lesbians, Kosovan Moslem gays......

It is bloody nonsense.

By the time all minorities have been catered for there will be no room for the majority or those who deserve to be where they are on merit.

Workingman wrote:It is bloody nonsense.
.

I quite agree. It is bloody nonsense. Like a lot of things that are banded about today.

Equality is getting to be all about equality for women at the expense of men. What about fathers. Why do many fathers have to go through the family courts, sometimes for years and at great expense, in order to maintain contact with their own children? It should be 50/50 shared parenting by default when a relationship breaks down. Successive Governments have maintained that the welfare of the child comes first. Yet they also maintain unless there are good reasons, children benefit from having both parents in their lives. So which is it? UKIP have 50/50 shared parenting in their manifesto. Another reason why I will be voting for Nigel.

Workingman wrote:So in a multi-culti, multi-faith, multi-lifestyle society where will it all end? Quotas for Sikhs, Moslems, Atheists, others for Africans, Poles, Asians, others for LGBT, more for African atheist lesbians, Kosovan Moslem gays......
It is bloody nonsense.
By the time all minorities have been catered for there will be no room for the majority or those who deserve to be where they are on merit.

You can add cyclists to your list ....

What about us pensioners?
We have had the vote for a long time so should know how to use it .