This is proving suprisingly enjoyable

Jesus TF Christ, Truss is picking some lightweights for the big jobs.

You don't have "many other examples", which is why you had to go back four years to find the one you cited. You're a joke.

Lulz.....

So completely preventable rape and sexual assault is fine because 70k other rapes?

j. f. c.

A series of posts was moved to the "Transgender issues"-thread, continue that tangent there.

The mask of tory fascism being unveiled and seemingly quite happy to go on record now







This is all too very 1984 for me to even find it funny that this political lightweight thinks he has the right to dictate what and who the public gets to listen to.

Why? We're debating Woke ideology of which gender issues are a major part. Just moving the selected posts makes no sense and is basically censoring the discussion.

Yes that is what I said.

Of course rape is utterly terrible = fine.

Strawman harder as you zero actual argument, absolutely zero and this immediate resort to hard core straw manning demonstrates that perfectly.

Do you have a handy widely used discursive meme to attribute the cause of vast vast majority of rapes to?

No, because that's the whole point of woke terror, which you bought into hook line and sinker.

Elrazor you have to understand that no one is disputing that there are zero incidence of "woke" or whatever phrase you want to use, of some progressive ideas being administered too zealously or in a way that is sub optimal.

The dispute is about the magnitude and importance of these incidence in the greater scheme of things given the massive concentration of attention on "woke" and how massive this phrase has become in public and political discourse.

When you weigh the actual impact of negative woke against the weight it carries in discourse there is a gargantuan imbalance between the perception of the extent of the problem, and the actual extent of the problem.

In essence the actual extent of the problem is minor in comparison to other problems/causes of problems whilst the perception of woke as a problem is massive.

Which is why I intellectually discount people who promote woke as huge problem, when it simply isnt and being able to pull a few examples of X and Y off the internet actually only demonstrates that further, because if the problem was as huge as those who have succumbed to woke terror say it is, the quantity and frequency of those examples would be much much much larger.

I also agree with Joe. However, the individual in question was exposed to the trauma of losing her job, was victimised and harassed online and had to use the legal system to get justice.

All for stating the non-controversial view that men and women are different.

Its not a dispute about if woke caused X, its a dispute about whether the frequency of such outcomes is enough for posters like Juk to declare that woke is some all consuming societal problem.

It clearly is not.

You can make this argument about any number of "Woke" issues when pitted against the "greater scheme of things". For example, how important are transgender issues in the "greater scheme of things"? To what degree is systemic racism an issue in the UK?

Many people would argue the actual extent of these problems and problems similar to them are minor in comparison to other problems/causes of problems.

The point being, that if enough people are talking about any specific issue, then it is de facto a problem. Just because you disagree with them does not make you the arbiter of truth.

This changes nothing.

Implicit in the term woke is that it a huge problem.

If someone uses woke pejoratively in relation to a problem its nearly always in a way that implies some huge problem as we can clearly see with Juks comments above.

According to Juk we cant solve environmental issues because of the preponderance of woke.

Nonsense.

If woke as pejorative was being used in context relative to its size as an actual objective problem then there is no issue with it as a meme.

Its objectively true that woke as a problem is routinely exaggerated and that does not require my arbitration.

Again, you can make this argument about any issue that woke ideology seeks to amplify, and this does not require my arbitration either.

Bigger problem than woke, modism:

We can at least agree on this point

i see the UK has appointed a climate skeptic to the top climate policy post. very Trumpian of the new gov't

Unless I'm missing something, Liz Truss' energy price cap makes little sense.

We just moved into a new house. Estimated annual use around ~£2500 a year. So, not really saving much which is fine as we can afford it.

However, with a cap any energy we use above £2500 is effectively free, so there is little incentive to be thrifty with energy use. Furthermore, we were going to get solar panels installed before winter. This is now a waste of money as we won't save sufficient money over the winter months to bring us under the price cap.

Effectively, lots of people in big houses will be very warm this winter, but it doesn't help those in smaller properties with more modest energy needs.

Sounds like the effective cause of almost every Tory policy it's almost as if they only care about the rich, shocking.

Wasn't this policy stolen from Labour?

No, she's freezing the cap (I believe), which is based on usage for an average home, so the more you use, the more you pay. Those in bigger homes benefit most.

The policy is a really blunt instrument. I'd be looking at - homes using over x amount of energy pay a surcharge.

Also, they need a big publicity campaign explaining just how serious the situation is and giving people tips on easy ways to save energy. We, and Europe (the Germans are in a worse spot here and have already started here), need to take action to cut usage. Without that, you solve nothing.

Possibly I'm not sure but if so that's just a another sign of how we don't have a Right vs Left in UK politics anymore and it's more just a nudge past middle right vs to the right of center.

I'm also not a Labour stan if you thought that was some kind of gotcha reply

Caping prices without policies to prevent luxury (and quite possibly a lot of non essential non luxury) energy use is a recipe for disaster.

If things go badly then we will run out. Wont matter how cheap we make it if we dont have sufficient supply for the demand.

Something like this is needed. A reverse poll tax type arrangement for a reasonable household amount followed by rapidly increasing prices. Plus serious preperation to ban things like we do in a drought.

The UK is really unlikely to run out without a serious technical problem of some sort. The Germans and Italians, however, may do.