SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
How about this, different topic, from the grauniad:

Could it be that, oh I don't know, boys are naturally better than girls at maths? But that boys are still being shafted by the educational system but their natural STEM performance means they still shine in those subjects?

You don't have a scooby
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
You don't have a scooby
You're the teacher - teach me.

From that article (and loads of others) - girls are absolutely shooting ahead in terms of educational attainment. Boys are not doing the same. However, in Maths they're tonking the girls. Could that not be that boys are inherently better at maths or naturally enjoy the subject more and are drawn to it? Or are you of the notion that boys and girls are identical?
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
boys do better at exams girls do better at coursework, coursework is almost dead - girls did better at covid results because it was based on their long term performance.

Not that it matters, white middle class boys/men are always the victims.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
boys do better at exams girls do better at coursework, coursework is almost dead - girls did better at covid results because it was based on their long term performance.
How come girls are streets ahead of boys in all of the other disciplines? Or have they just ditched coursework for maths, and nothing else?



Not that it matters, white middle class boys/men are always the victims.
You sound like a stuffy bloke from the 70's complaining when people pointed out that girls or ethnical minorities were being disadvantaged, just in reverse and 50 years later.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,408
The Telegraph has been doing a lot of these releases lately. It's very likely more Tufton St bullshit. Just have a read about the "Centre for Migration Control" and their extremely dodgy use of statistics.

For example. Does the report complaining about this "reverse bias" make any adjustments for staff at the BBC who have declined to identify their race or sexuality?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
I mean, who declines?*

Methinks people are scrabbling to find reasons to protect something they thought was good, but knew was, at best, flawed.


*Edit: Apparently 6% of people in the last census. So not many.
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
It seems apart from the hideous sight of assorted plastics in every hedgerow in Devon many people will stave from microplastics affecting photosynthesis:

It's such a shame that stuff like this and climate change have been taken off the table completely :(
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
It's such a shame that stuff like this and climate change have been taken off the table completely :(
Agree. Amongst Starmer's first acts was to cut his 28bn green investment plan and give a massive wadge to BP and equinor to fund unproven CCS (whilst they upped their dividend), greenlight new runways in Heathrow (and probably Gatwick), and is rowing back on the 'no new oil & gas' by sneaky means.

They don't have a plan for microplastics. But then, nobody in the world does. :(

You can't blame Trump for what we stopped doing before Trump got elected.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,571
DEI working well at Auntie I see:




DEI. Ensuring everybody gets to be discriminated against.

Ah, technically correct, the best kind of correct.

The stats apply to the Senior Leader category in the BBC which is 293 people, but because it skews because min/max salary level is so wide at this level a handful of people can distort the stats with just one or two salaries. There are less than 40 people in the SL category from a BAME background, and slightly more LGBT (and no doubt some in both categories), numbers that are too small to be statistically significant.

The actual report if you want to unpick it. You can make it play any narrative you like, because...stats.

FWIW I'm more disturbed by the section on representation in content which is depressingly statistical (everyone is represented equally, yay...) and can't be good for programming if you're always referring back to the stats.

 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
The actual report if you want to unpick it.
Thought I'd take a quick look:

1741643849809.png

So the biggest weighting is indeed the 12.6% in the senior leader group as stated - but according to this, BAME earn more than their white counterparts across the board?

I mean. It's late, I'm tired, but it looks to me very much like the Torygraph is bob-on?
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
23,213
What if you were born with half a penis and half a vagina ?
I ask because a friend of mine......
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
Agree. Amongst Starmer's first acts was to cut his 28bn green investment plan and give a massive wadge to BP and equinor to fund unproven CCS (whilst they upped their dividend), greenlight new runways in Heathrow (and probably Gatwick), and is rowing back on the 'no new oil & gas' by sneaky means.

They don't have a plan for microplastics. But then, nobody in the world does. :(

You can't blame Trump for what we stopped doing before Trump got elected.

Serious?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
Absolutely Trump is a giant giant thundercunt - I've been posting on that since he was first elected. In fact, I've been posting here on environmental issues ever since I joined Barrysworld, just after University where I studied Environmental Management, whilst you were still a baby. However - Trump currently being a thundercunt should never allow Labour off the hook for their actions - which are despicable.

We don't vote for American presidents @Gwadien - but we do vote for the UK Government. Are you so obsessed what's happening in other countries that you refuse to take a look at what the party you voted for are doing?

I came here to post this:


On the face of it the Labour government is giving £1m for "science" to "investigate" what's going on in the Wye. But we already know what's going on in the Wye catchment. What Labour is actually doing is cutting £34 million from the action plan that was in place before they were voted in.

You could spin this as a "Tory trap", but it was there and Labour decided to stop it. Just like Labour decided to ditch their 28bn green investment plan, Labour decided to roll back environmental protections on the green belt and rip out the environmental protections in the planning laws, Labour decided to back a new runway in Heathrow, Labour decided to get around the no new oil and gas and "drill baby drill".

So yes. Serious.

Am I wrong?
 
Last edited:

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
Absolutely Trump is a giant giant thundercunt - I've been posting on that since he was first elected. In fact, I've been posting here on environmental issues ever since I joined Barrysworld, just after University where I studied Environmental Management, whilst you were still a baby. However - Trump currently being a thundercunt should never allow Labour off the hook for their actions - which are despicable.

We don't vote for American presidents @Gwadien - but we do vote for the UK Government. Are you so obsessed what's happening in other countries that you refuse to take a look at what the party you voted for are doing?

I came here to post this:


On the face of it the Labour government is giving £1m for "science" to "investigate" what's going on in the Wye. But we already know what's going on in the Wye catchment. What Labour is actually doing is cutting £34 million from the action plan that was in place before they were voted in.

You could spin this as a "Tory trap", but it was there and Labour decided to stop it. Just like Labour decided to ditch their 28bn green investment plan, Labour decided to roll back environmental protections on the green belt and rip out the environmental protections in the planning laws, Labour decided to back a new runway in Heathrow, Labour decided to get around the no new oil and gas and "drill baby drill".

So yes. Serious.

Am I wrong?

Well you're not wrong they did do that, but I think they absolutely were right to do so - Trump enabled climate change denial en mass - remember pre-Trump post-Gore when everyone (the West) was largely on board with the whole climate change thing, and I think we were pretty close to making in a non-partisan issue. So it absolutely was the right choice for Labour in the sense of getting votes in and keeping those votes by avoiding lefty woke issues - such as climate change.

Save £28bn on green lefty woke initiative? brilliant, few votes from the Tories/Reform.

You also literally quoted 'drill baby drill' lol.

ez oil money, ez growth. Everyone loves 'growth'.
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,989
Oh, and I've finally worked it out - it really shouldn't have taken me this long.

You change your politics to oppose the government of the day, don't you?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
Well you're not wrong they did do that, but I think they absolutely were right to do so
Jeesus. You think wholesale ditching of environmental commitments is good?

The planning, Wye Valley, airports, "drill baby drill" - they all came after the election. Labour didn't have to do that. They did that after the election.

And I'm really happy that you are fully advocating a "lie to the electorate to get in" pattern in our politics. Nice.

You also literally quoted 'drill baby drill' lol.
On purpose. To show that Starmer is doing what Trump is doing.

I think you need to give up the weed m8.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
Oh, and I've finally worked it out - it really shouldn't have taken me this long.

You change your politics to oppose the government of the day, don't you?
No. I support stuff that is good (I've said credit where credit is due to both the tories and labour) and oppose stuff that is bad.

I'm not wedded to any party because that's just fucking stupid IMO. I vote based on what I think would be better on balance. I voted green recently because both the Tories and Labour are woeful on the environment - which is the existential issue of our times - but I didn't think Labour would work out worse.

I also held out hope that Labour would do some stuff on social care or the NHS, but they've lied to everyone and they're not doing anything, whilst putting in another round of austerity.

On balance, right now, with the programme Labour is actually running (but not telling anyone about), the Tories are probably a better bet. They're the same economically, without the Labour bullshit baggage.

Problem with the Tories is that every single one of them is an intellectual lightweight. The problem is Labour does have a few clever people knocking about - but they're doing bad things.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,408
Put a new mobo and cpu in my PC, installed a fresh Windows 11 (I had been on 10).

My god what a pain in the arse it is. Not only the million notifications of "A NEW COMPUTER HAS ACCESSED YOUR ACCOUNT" from all the logins I had to do, but all the "classic shell" type apps I had to install to get rid of this fucking SHITE Windows 11 taskbar bullshit. Who the hell thought it'd be a good idea to not allow you to move it around? Anyhow I now have a Windows 10 taskbar, so fuck you Bill.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
LOL


.what I found in 2017: male BMI increases after marriage and decreases just before and after divorce. The main possible reasons are that single men looking for a partner have higher incentives and exert more effort to stay fit than those who are already or still married. And second, those in relationships may eat more regular meals and/or richer foods due to social obligations, which may arise because of marriage
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,066
@Wij, I wish you were here dude.

The shit we've talked about for decades and fantasised about in a Highlander II fashion is coming true:


I would very much like to debate whether giving one's life in a (probably futile) effort to prohibit human idiocy is either effective or worth it with ya

But whatevz. Wherever you are in life, I hope it doesn't suck dude.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom