Search results

Being apolitical to a genocide doesn’t go down well with most people, funny enough.

Why are you so sure that the service you found difficult and obstructive is not like that for everyone? No doubt there are people far better at playing the system than the rest of us. The only ‘benefit’ I’ve ever claimed is the free childcare hours, and the amount of hoops we’ve had to jump...

Of course there are people exploiting the system, and the loopholes and workarounds should be closed as best we can. But I'm also aware that having a welfare system that no one exploits is a total pipe dream.

I think you're probably right culturally. But I think it's also true that in reality people know 'free houses and free benefits' is nowhere near as easy nor attractive a lifestyle as they pretend it is - if it were, far more people would be at it.

Why do you bother working if you believe you could get a free house and free benefits without having to do anything? If it was as easy as you present, surely no one would bother working..?

Why cut the paragraph there? Over the last three years, more than a quarter-million Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces there. The majority of them have been noncombatants: women, the elderly and tens of thousands of children. Many thousands more remain missing...

The other story that has been grumbling along all week is Ed Sheeran taking a battering for his 'apolitical' stance on Gaza - all of his support acts have dropped out and his popularity with the public is plummeting. Ed Sheeran's support acts quit tour in support of Macklemore It turns out...

Talks of energy bills increasing 25% by January. Petrol prices exploding again. Interest rates rising again. Rents on the climb. You'd hope we're approaching some sort of breaking point, but our media are more concerned with boats.

From the famous lefty Tucker Carlson on X: “ According to an informed federal official, in the coming months the Trump administration plans to send a total of 40,000 Mark 84 and Blu-117 bombs to the government of Israel. Each bomb weighs 2,000 pounds. This appears to be the largest transfer of...

“attraction is an individual response, sexualisation is the way someone is presented. Nobody is suggesting sportswomen should be able to dictate whether individual viewers find them attractive - that's obviously absurd. The criticism is of a commercial decision to make sexual appeal the primary...

Off you trot.

Again, 'sportswomen want to be respected, not fancied' does not mean 'if you fancy a sportswoman you don't respect her” - so no, the implication your suggesting is nonsense. The distinction you keep dismissing as meaningless is the entire point; attraction is an individual response...

Yeah, obviously common sense for men on a forum to decide that all but a tiny percentage of women love being ogled and fantasised over by strangers. Good old common sense (y)

Finally, an explanation... although you're obviously conflating different arguments. Nobody is saying that if you find a sportswoman attractive, you therefore don't respect her talent. Obviously you can fancy someone and respect them. The point is about what is being emphasised about the...

Give me strength.

They could do these days!

Strawman Spindle at it again 🤣

The double standard of women who criticised Sydney Sweeney and also ogled an unnamed tennis player who took his shirt off - we obviously have no idea what overlap exists between those groups, but you can just invent one as it suits.

SO WHAT PART OF 'NOT BEING RESPECTED' DOESN'T MAKE SENSE? YOU SAID IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WHY DOESN'T IT MAKE SENSE!? It's definitely deliberate :drunk:

Ok, so you have no idea if there's a double standard, but you're going to fling the accusation around regardless. The republican bit genuinely made me laugh - credit where it's due.