The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. General Discussion & Feedback
  3. Just Chat!
  4. Sexist?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Sexist?

  • 10 Replies
  • 3562 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

This topic contains a post which is marked as Best Answer. Press here if you would like to see it.

guest39538

  • Guest
Sexist?
« on: 28/07/2018 19:56:15 »
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3376846/Five-years-jail-men-emotionally-bully-wives-New-law-target-bullies-control-partners-coercive-controlling-behaviour.html

Why not the other way around too?

Logged
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31102
  • Activity:
    9%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #1 on: 28/07/2018 20:10:17 »
Quote from: Thebox on 28/07/2018 19:56:15
Why not the other way around too?
Why do you assume it's one sided?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #2 on: 28/07/2018 20:28:33 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/07/2018 20:10:17
Quote from: Thebox on 28/07/2018 19:56:15
Why not the other way around too?
Why do you assume it's one sided?

The title....
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31102
  • Activity:
    9%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #3 on: 28/07/2018 20:46:00 »
It's the Daily Mail, they don't do proper reporting.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #4 on: 28/07/2018 20:56:50 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/07/2018 20:46:00
It's the Daily Mail, they don't do proper reporting.
Seemingly, I think the notion and law will cause chaos in the courts.  A case of it wasn't me, it was him and it wasn't me , it was her.  Hence cancelling bullying out, into healthy arguments between couples.

I mean how could anybody prove such a thing?

It is not very good thinking to say the least although the right intentions are there.




Logged
 



Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    0.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #5 on: 28/07/2018 21:06:57 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/07/2018 20:46:00
It's the Daily Mail, they don't do proper reporting.

Not to mention the article says, "Five million women and 2.5 million men will suffer abuse in their lives", uses gender-neutral phrases like, "Bullies who emotionally abuse partners face up to five years in prison" and "Under laws coming into force today, anyone who inflicts psychological cruelty on their other halves can be prosecuted" and even has a picture of a woman with a rolling pin in one hand standing over her cowering husband.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #6 on: 28/07/2018 21:16:46 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 28/07/2018 21:06:57
anyone who inflicts psychological cruelty on their other halves can be prosecuted

Why only other halves?  Why not extend this to any governing body who inflicts psychological cruelty on the governed.  I mean , a fine example would be the person I care for got kicked off ESA ,  by the results on a form that some assessor had lied on.   The assessor and system made her feel useless, psychological cruelty by taking away means of support for somebody who is medically proved ill.
Why are none doctors , overruling doctors? Quite clearly it is false practice .




Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31102
  • Activity:
    9%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Sexist?
« Reply #7 on: 28/07/2018 21:25:42 »
Quote from: Thebox on 28/07/2018 21:16:46
Quite clearly it is false practice .
I knew we would agree on something eventually.
The system is based on an assumed lie- "all people on benefits are scroungers".
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Marked as best answer by on 22/08/2025 19:30:58

guest39538

  • Guest
  • Undo Best Answer
  • Re: Sexist?
    « Reply #8 on: 28/07/2018 21:41:36 »
    Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/07/2018 21:25:42
    Quote from: Thebox on 28/07/2018 21:16:46
    Quite clearly it is false practice .

     
    I knew we would agree on something eventually.
    The system is based on an assumed lie- "all people on benefits are scroungers".

    That is a lie, people are on benefits for all sorts of reasons, we are not all scroungers.   I do admit there is some scroungers ,  but a lot of people are genuine.   I mean the care money and income support I get, I put into the 'family'' pot, she failed the first appeal and was too sad to fight anymore.  I say ''family'' in quote, because we are a ''couple' as in two', not a couple that is intimate, I am ''free' to leave if I choose to, but what sort of man walks away from responsibility?
    Anyway , another two months she can make a fresh claim , which is easier than the appeal process. It doesn't help I am getting a bit depressed now also , I really need a job of some description, ideally working from  here so I can continue to care.  It is quite ironic , she will walk the shop in pain, because that is the only independence she has really got, but for a certainty she can't work , to depressed more than anything because of the pain. 
    I am stuck for answers, do you have any?

    My paradox was to go work without leaving my care role, so the obvious first solution was a job working from ''home''. But I have now extended that horizon .






    Logged
     



    Offline Bored chemist

    • Naked Science Forum GOD!
    • *******
    • 31102
    • Activity:
      9%
    • Thanked: 1291 times
    Re: Sexist?
    « Reply #9 on: 28/07/2018 21:48:17 »
    I'm fairly sure that most are honest, but the government wants to paint them as  liars.
    Logged
    Please disregard all previous signatures.
     

    guest39538

    • Guest
    Re: Sexist?
    « Reply #10 on: 28/07/2018 21:58:10 »
    Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/07/2018 21:48:17
    I'm fairly sure that most are honest, but the government wants to paint them as  liars.
    Are the government all doctors?  When a doctor can call who I care for a liar, then it would be time to listen to who lies or not..   The hospital told her after her x-rays etc, there is very little they can do, it will do nothing but get worse.   So how can anyone who is not a doctor argue with that?
    If the doctor said she was fit and healthy , then yes she would need to work. Some person lying on a form to make quota, is just BS.

    Even more hilarious, once they give you less, they charge you more in bills.  £50 in council tax yesterday that killed the budget.   


    Perhaps she should sue the NHS for all these tablets she keeps taking, wouldn't need to make any claims then would she.  Read the headlines,

    NHS feeds tablets to a mother of two, for years, telling her she was ill.
     

    The NHS , killing you softly with their ''song'',  the song that you are ill.   
    However , . known facts have recently proven the NHS to be wrong.  These findings  by the official investigative  government department of DWP's  , proving conclusively  the NHS to be corrupt in declaring people have illness, showing falsifiable results of these charlatan doctors of the NHS.
    One must confess, the title of this article is meant to be satire and not a true reflection of the reality, that unofficial doctors are declaring doctors to be incorrect and declaring ill people are fit for work. 
    How does this reflect on society?  What becomes the worth of studying medicine and health if the qualified professionals are going to be ignored ? 
    The future for medical students looks bleak, but not as bleak as the poor mother of two left in pain and depression by an uncaring government.   A government who's values revolve around the wealth of the island , the soil and earth,  ignoring the health of the people they have due care for.

    Lol it wants tidying up.....




    Logged
     



    • Print
    Pages: [1]   Go Up
    « previous next »
    Tags:
     
    There was an error while thanking
    Thanking...
    • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
      Privacy Policy
      SMFAds for Free Forums
    • Naked Science Forum ©

    Page created in 1.041 seconds with 48 queries.

    • Podcasts
    • Articles
    • Get Naked
    • About
    • Contact us
    • Advertise
    • Privacy Policy
    • Subscribe to newsletter
    • We love feedback

    Follow us

    cambridge_logo_footer.png

    ©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.