And a fat, ugly b****** !!

So that's it? Just lock up all women in the kitchen because there is a higher propensity for neuroses? Even though the link you gave stated that "a 2010 review found personality differences between genders to be between small and moderate."

You give yourself away by assuming that it's just the case of taking a man out of a position and putting a women there instead. It's not a simple numbers game, it's about putting the best person for the position in that position, whether it be day care nurse or President of the United States.

Going into a selection with the presumption that any particular women is going to be less able because there is a "small to moderate" chance that she might be more neurotic than male contenders is the very defionti9ojn of prejudice. Of course, a female candidate might be the most equipped person for the job and Woody Allen is the competition, but you'd go with the man...just in case. Right?

Or, let's take a non-hypothetical: Do you think Hillary Clinton would have stirred up a hornets nest in North Korea; destabilized world security by threatening to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal; deliberately sabotaged the U.S. health insurance market - costing 1 million people their insurance coverage, putting up premiums for all by as much as 20% and the treasury 200 billion dollars in the process; ignored the major disaster unfolding in Puerto Rico (other than lobbing a few rolls of paper towels at people); and got into not one, not two, but three public hissy fits with the families of active military personnel killed in the line of duty while spending half her time golfing?

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Nope, I believe in meritocracy. Unstable behaviour is unstable behaviour...But judge the individual...if a woman's good enough it doesn't matter to me....I'm sure personality differences are between small and moderate....not insignificant though.....Again Ray....fairness, not equality....just to wind you up.

Give myself away? I'm honest about my beliefs. I'm not sure what that means....I have my preferences for different genders in different roles but I agree with you....meritocracy works.

Judge the individual against the demands of the job. Woody Allen? Ray, you're waffling.

We don't know what Clinton would have done. Maybe we'd be at war with Russia over Syria....but I doubt it.

The reasons Trump won are multifaceted......I was happy Clinton lost....but that's not the same as saying I supported Trump. I like aspects about Trump that you hate..but I'm no republican. If Sanders had ran I would have probably preferred him. Clinton being a female wasn't the reason I didn't like her....I liked Thatcher as a leader.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Oct 2017 5.18pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

A quote I saw the other day struck a chord: "We don't need men to start protecting women; we need men to stop protecting men!"

They're going to try and attach all their sins to Harvey Scapegoat and toss him over a cliff. I hope that we don't let this happen, and we allow people the space to call out abusers like Weinstein.

An obvious correlation is with police using excessive force with black men - no longer is there a knee jerk reaction that the victim is lying and the press gives space to such accusations. Once we move off the "they deserved it / they asked for it" default position, anything can happen.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

I'm not sure how Trump Jnr saying if you don't like being harassed get out of the workplace has anything to do with putting words in people's mouths.

You've also said you weren't going to engage with me. Not a man of your word are you? Tsk.

You can shift the balance of power, and the system of power inherent in society.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]