ChaoticMusings

Date: Apr 2 10:36 AM, 2025

RE: Is Britain broken?

Date: Apr 2 11:27 AM, 2025

I apologise Syl, I thought you said another referendum WOULD be on the cards. So dismiss the above. sorry !

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

I know something, I would rather live on this uncertain side of the pond than your side Maddog...and that is a fact.

Red Okktober · Getting Gobby

Maddog wrote:

The EU is pretty wobbly right now..I don't see a single advantage to hitching your wagon to that. I can understand NATO..That does make sense for the UK..

But to allow any decision that impacts British citizens to be made by non British politicians is stupidity..

I agree

There were pros and cons of being in the EU just there are pros and cons of being out of it. People can cherrypick their argument and probably make a good case whatever side of the fence they are on.

Personally I can't be arsed to go over it all again, but imo the EU is a dead man walking in the long term, too much dead wood and too many fragile economies.

Date: Apr 2 1:38 PM, 2025

Red are you saying we have benefited from Brexit? And with Trump's tariffs descending if you don't want to make a deal with Europe how do you think we can improve our economic prospects?

Maddog · Go Outside

Anonymous wrote:
Maddog honestly we are broke as a country and need any financial assistance a deal with EU could provide. I think assuming we could have a second referendum is slightly arrogant as it's not our choice to make and the result would be irrelevant. It's up to the EU if they have us back. It was so foolish to leave, they gave Wales thirty million pounds annually which we turned our nose up at! David Cameron knew it was the economic death knell for us when we chose to leave.

The EU doesn't have any money either..

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
I know something, I would rather live on this uncertain side of the pond than your side Maddog...and that is a fact.

What do you have against Canada?

Maybe they should join the EU?.😎

Maddog · Go Outside

Magica · Go Outside

Maddog wrote:

Not sure this will help, who knows?

Maddog · Go Outside

Magica wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Not sure this will help, who knows?

This is just another attack on boys saying they are the problem.

The problem is well above their pay grade and centered in institutions that promote this sort of "re-education"..

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

I haven't seen it, so maybe I shouldn't comment...but I will.

The internet and access to porn so early in life, has imo, influenced some young minds to look at females as pieces of meat, to be used and discarded.

Obviously respect for the opposite sex should be taught at home, if it is, what harm can this do? If it's not, maybe it will stop some young minds developing hatred and disgust for women and girls.

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
I haven't seen it, so maybe I shouldn't comment...but I will.
The internet and access to porn so early in life, has imo, influenced some young minds to look at females as pieces of meat, to be used and discarded.
Obviously respect for the opposite sex should be taught at home, if it is, what harm can this do? If it's not, maybe it will stop some young minds developing hatred and disgust for women and girls.

Depends on your definition of anti misogyny.

Wasn't Starmer in charge of protecting young girls years ago?

Maddog · Go Outside

I mean if you have people that can define a woman defining misogyny, you're in trouble

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I haven't seen it, so maybe I shouldn't comment...but I will.
The internet and access to porn so early in life, has imo, influenced some young minds to look at females as pieces of meat, to be used and discarded.
Obviously respect for the opposite sex should be taught at home, if it is, what harm can this do? If it's not, maybe it will stop some young minds developing hatred and disgust for women and girls.
Depends on your definition of anti misogyny.

Wasn't Starmer in charge of protecting young girls years ago?

Apparently, those cases didn't 'pass his desk'.

If this film is shown in schools, presumably there will be discussions about it with responsible adults present....do you object to that?

Barksdale · Getting Gobby

Maddog wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
They won't have us back and I don't blame them. They asked us not to leave and we trusted Farage and said "nah its ok, we're better off without you". Hopefully they take pity on us in some form because the UK economy is in tatters. And of course we would be crawling back. We can't afford pride.
The EU is pretty wobbly right now..I don't see a single advantage to hitching your wagon to that. I can understand NATO..That does make sense for the UK..

But to allow any decision that impacts British citizens to be made by non British politicians is stupidity..

The benefits for us would principally be tariff free, frictionless trade within existing networks (which would particularly benefits SMEs) as well as filling labour shortages in healthcare, hospitality and construction and having influence on broad areas of real importance such as security, climate policy and tech monopolies. We used to be incredibly good at exerting soft power - the iron fist in the velvet glove. Now we have the idiocy of Farage style diplomacy and have lost global standing as a result.

However, re-joining the EU (or even a Customs Union) is about as likely as us now finalising the much promised US trade deal after Brexit or taxing the rich - very low. Ordinarily I would advocate for a cautious measured approach. However, sometimes you need to put the top down, stick one finger in the air and floor the accelerator. That time is now. Unfortunately we have the equivalent of Postman Pat as Prime Minister so that isn't on the cards.

There is a time for a nice man. However, now is the time for a warrior.

Barksdale · Getting Gobby

Syl wrote:
I haven't seen it, so maybe I shouldn't comment...but I will.
The internet and access to porn so early in life, has imo, influenced some young minds to look at females as pieces of meat, to be used and discarded.
Obviously respect for the opposite sex should be taught at home, if it is, what harm can this do? If it's not, maybe it will stop some young minds developing hatred and disgust for women and girls.

I think Adolescence is really for parents, rather than young boys, so they know the challenging world their kids face, to be alive to it and help their young men deal with it.

That said showing it in schools and leading a discussion on it could be beneficial, especially for a minority of young boys who lack a male role model and have been radicalised by idiots like Andrew Tate. They are definitely a presence and are deeply misogynistic. As a father of young girls I know what goes on (pictures of girls being deep faked and put on to porn sites as revenge, shaming young women who don't want to have sex early or dress a certain way.)

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I haven't seen it, so maybe I shouldn't comment...but I will.
The internet and access to porn so early in life, has imo, influenced some young minds to look at females as pieces of meat, to be used and discarded.
Obviously respect for the opposite sex should be taught at home, if it is, what harm can this do? If it's not, maybe it will stop some young minds developing hatred and disgust for women and girls.
Depends on your definition of anti misogyny.

Wasn't Starmer in charge of protecting young girls years ago?
Apparently, those cases didn't 'pass his desk'.
If this film is shown in schools, presumably there will be discussions about it with responsible adults present....do you object to that?

I don't have a problem with showing the movie.

I do have a problem with an entity that was useless in defending young girls, explaining to boys, what is wrong with them..

Boys are already facing serious problems from a woke mantra that attacks anything masculine..

Maddog · Go Outside

Scott isn't right wing nor is Maher.

They get it. I'm not saying boys shouldn't be talked to, buy maybe calling them misogynists isn't the right approach..

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Maddog wrote:

Scott isn't right wing nor is Maher.

They get it. I'm not saying boys shouldn't be talked to, buy maybe calling them misogynists isn't the right approach..

Pinning labels on young kids is obviously wrong, that surely wouldn't happen. Discussion can never be harmful though if it's done with care and empathy.

Will watch the vid later.

Barksdale · Getting Gobby

Maddog wrote:

Scott isn't right wing nor is Maher.

They get it. I'm not saying boys shouldn't be talked to, buy maybe calling them misogynists isn't the right approach..

I knew Scott Galloway was going to say Porsche polygamy before that clip ended (don't know if you listen to Diary of a CEO but the most recent podcast is Scott in debate with Logan Ury about the crisis of masculinity and it is excellent,)

I suspect we actually agree on the issue and dealing with young men's issues with empathy. I don't really see this as a right wing v left wing thing,