Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, phart said:

The person (if it's the green party person) was making a point using reductio ad absurdum. If someone is wholesale swallowing that idea it just goes Poe's Law is alive and kicking.

Indeed. That point was raised with Bardell, however she confirmed she was in fact 100% serious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 16k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thplinth's typical reaction whenever he's respectfully challenged by other posters about his (borderline spam posting) increasingly paranoid, conspiracy supporting, right wing views ..... T

You think you're becoming more pragmatic, can see both sides, with age and then an individual turns your country into a colony.  And I use that word advisedly. Don't even need to defend their pos

You might think Denise and the #iamthestorm crowd are exaggerating, but just look at the evidence. Over here in Ireland we've had gender recognition certificates for years now. As a result, Irela

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Jim Beem said:

A reasonable summary 😂 She's genuinely doubled/tripled down on it. 

Sadly this sort of stuff is very NU SNP

There's a problem with attacks no doubt about it. Putting in a curfew on a demograph cause a minority of them commit the vast majority of it doesn't work.

I get it that emotions have been running hig regard this issue though. Hopefully a more reasoned and nuanced thought process will emerge.

The original point was made to highlight the police deciding to tell woman to stay in when they were the victims and men the attackers, so the counter point was made. At the time of writing the main suspect is a policeman which further adds to the mix of the police telling woman to stay inside. It was a good point, to abandon that context and actually suggest it as a straight up solution is... foolish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s got feck all to do with Indy2, but the last couple of days on social media over the Sarah Everard murder have been embarrassing. There’s absolute fucking weapons all over the place, from men shouting not all men, to women saying they are terrified constantly. One woman said that the majority of women in London are attacked every single day. There was a woman who walks with her keys in one hand, and an alarm in the other, and has done so for over 30 years, nothing has happened to her, but she is so scared than over 11000 days without incident isn’t enough to convince her otherwise. Trust someone from the SNP to get involved and make a complete cunt of themselves yet again. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kumnio said:

It’s got feck all to do with Indy2, but the last couple of days on social media over the Sarah Everard murder have been embarrassing. There’s absolute fucking weapons all over the place, from men shouting not all men, to women saying they are terrified constantly. One woman said that the majority of women in London are attacked every single day. There was a woman who walks with her keys in one hand, and an alarm in the other, and has done so for over 30 years, nothing has happened to her, but she is so scared than over 11000 days without incident isn’t enough to convince her otherwise. Trust someone from the SNP to get involved and make a complete cunt of themselves yet again. 

I think that some of this is similar to the fear parents have letting kids have any freedom. It hasn't suddenly got more dangerous it is just perceptions have changed. I must admit that there have been times I have felt a sense of fear and wouldn't walk certain places but I recognise that isn't based on any evidence and nothing has happened to make me feel this way.

I have had certain unwanted behaviour over the year but that has generally revolved around pubs and alcohol.

Of the people I know it is the men who have been attacked and I am pretty sure there are places they are at risk walking by themselves.

I don't dismiss the issue entirely because it does exist but the real problem is with people known to women. They are the ones more likely to be the danger. I believe men are more at risk from strangers.

The other thing that jars with me is why this particular case is getting so much attention. One reason with be that the suspect is a policeman but I can't help think it is because the victim is  a white middle class woman. There are many other victims who don't matter because they are not part of this demograph and it is shameful that no one really cares when it happens to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lamia said:

I think that some of this is similar to the fear parents have letting kids have any freedom. It hasn't suddenly got more dangerous it is just perceptions have changed. I must admit that there have been times I have felt a sense of fear and wouldn't walk certain places but I recognise that isn't based on any evidence and nothing has happened to make me feel this way.

I have had certain unwanted behaviour over the year but that has generally revolved around pubs and alcohol.

Of the people I know it is the men who have been attacked and I am pretty sure there are places they are at risk walking by themselves.

I don't dismiss the issue entirely because it does exist but the real problem is with people known to women. They are the ones more likely to be the danger. I believe men are more at risk from strangers.

The other thing that jars with me is why this particular case is getting so much attention. One reason with be that the suspect is a policeman but I can't help think it is because the victim is  a white middle class woman. There are many other victims who don't matter because they are not part of this demograph and it is shameful that no one really cares when it happens to them.

It’s similar to Maddy McCann IMO, had it been a male, Black or Asian woman, it wouldn’t have received as much attention. Bad comment here, but she was an attractive woman, which makes it a bigger story. 

I think I’ve moaned for decades about the influence of social media, I think it’s an absolute utter cancer on humanity. Facebook, Twitter etc lead people down dark places, and fills their head with absolute bullshit. Even normal media, we get shown a guy in America getting killed, or an attack in Australia, it just builds this fear into people, but we have generally never been safer.

As a bloke, I’ve felt unsafe twice, once in London, and once in Milan. The worst I will probably get is robbed and a smack in the puss, of course it’s worse for women. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jim Beem said:

Indeed. That point was raised with Bardell, however she confirmed she was in fact 100% serious. 

Someone should ask her what a man is and if that man self identifies as a women can they go out after 6

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jim Beem said:

A reasonable summary 😂 She's genuinely doubled/tripled down on it. 

Sadly this sort of stuff is very NU SNP

You could understand and forgive some daft wee lassie with a nose ring posting some misandrist shite like that on Twitter for likes, but an elected public official doing it is pitiful.

Many of the people making these sweeping generalisations about an entire gender after this horrific crime would likely be breaking their necks to condemn anyone making blanket statements against Muslims after a terrorist attack had been carried out by some extremist nutter, and they'd be right to.  Most, no doubt, will have forgotten about this poor lassie in a couple of weeks. 

I'm no psychologist, but if some man is twisted enough to be motivated to go out and hurt women, he's probably not going to pay much attention to a curfew anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every party has a village idiot for sure and the SNP are no different for sure. Look at that daft old Tory MP who has voted against sensible bills like upskirting etc. I cannot remember his name but he is known as an oddball. The Tories have other zoomers as does the Labour Party and beyond. It happens. If a candidate can disguise their fruit loopishness in canvassing for election and gets elected then we are powerless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, exile said:

For anyone who likes a good conspiracy theory: has a recent poll been biased by its geographical weighting?

https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2021/03/11/is-poll-biased-against-glasgow-i-should-probably-ask-an-expert/

General point.

It's really hard to get a representative sample.

It's why physics is such a succesful discipline compared to others. You're looking at homogenous "simple" behaving subjects and even then it becomes a mathmatical nightmare really quickly.

Add in something as complex as humans and it basically becomes an educated guessing game.

Specific point.

Looks like they have fudged that by inappropriately taking more from a pool that isn't representative of the mean/whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scotlad said:

You could understand and forgive some daft wee lassie with a nose ring posting some misandrist shite like that on Twitter for likes, but an elected public official doing it is pitiful.

Many of the people making these sweeping generalisations about an entire gender after this horrific crime would likely be breaking their necks to condemn anyone making blanket statements against Muslims after a terrorist attack had been carried out by some extremist nutter, and they'd be right to.  Most, no doubt, will have forgotten about this poor lassie in a couple of weeks. 

I'm no psychologist, but if some man is twisted enough to be motivated to go out and hurt women, he's probably not going to pay much attention to a curfew anyway.

The original point was totally fair in response to the police suggestion. I don't agree with women forgetting about the lassie, for some reason this has really resonated in a deeply profound way as opposed to just being the useful social media led 2 day event.

The SNP has had several people who just don't align with my views at all. Starting from how they were funded for a very long time, right up to the expansion period where they suddenly became attractive for a lot of people. I haven't voted for them for a long long time. I am swithering on just going 2 votes for them this time and seeing where that goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Every party has a village idiot for sure and the SNP are no different for sure. Look at that daft old Tory MP who has voted against sensible bills like upskirting etc. I cannot remember his name but he is known as an oddball. The Tories have other zoomers as does the Labour Party and beyond. It happens. If a candidate can disguise their fruit loopishness in canvassing for election and gets elected then we are powerless.

Christopher chope mp for Christchurch horrible Tory bastard he once claimed over £800 to repair his sofa 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, phart said:

General point.

It's really hard to get a representative sample.

It's why physics is such a succesful discipline compared to others. You're looking at homogenous "simple" behaving subjects and even then it becomes a mathmatical nightmare really quickly.

Add in something as complex as humans and it basically becomes an educated guessing game.

Specific point.

Looks like they have fudged that by inappropriately taking more from a pool that isn't representative of the mean/whole.

Which is exactly why polling companies apply weightings based on a range of demographic factors to the raw numbers to try and make the published results as representative as possible.

In this survey, it looks like they have had a higher number of respondents than the statistical mean from South of Scotland and a lower number from Glasgow, but that is why the weighted numbers have been reduced for South of Scotland and increased for Glasgow.

The mistake the author has made is not in understanding how the weightings work but in getting the size of the electorate wrong.  He quotes two examples, South of Scotland and Glasgow.

I don't know the exact size of the electoral role for each of those regions - if I could be bothered to dig deep enough no doubt I could find them - but we can imply something from the actual number of list votes cast in 2016.

In the South of Scotland approximately 315k list votes were cast in 2016, which in itself is some way higher than the 208k he is quoting for electors.  However when you take into account turnout - again no regional list breakdown I can see - but the national list turnout was 56%, so that gives you an indicative turnout of about 540k.  So that's a bit of a whopper.

For Glasgow, there were approximately 250k votes cast in Glasgow and if you apply the same turnout to that comes out at 431k.  The 462k he quotes is probably closer to the actual number given the estimated population of Glasgow City is around 620k and obviously not all of those will be on the electoral register.

It's probably correct that a higher proportion of voters turned out in the South of Scotland than in Glasgow - general demographic research on likelihood to vote would support that - however that in itself will be reflected in the weighting.

This doesn't look wrong to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, phart said:

Where's the confirmation?

I saw this last night.  Seems only to be Craig Murray saying this at present.  I checked a few Scottish political journalists who are saying nothing which would appear to suggest there's nothing to it.

In fact, just double checking to see if there had been any movement and I see this has just been published in the Guardian which suggests the opposite.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/12/msps-dismiss-claims-nicola-sturgeons-husband-conspired-to-destroy-alex-salmond

Craig Murray seems to be getting his information from Salmond or his proxies and this has been a constant theme from that side.  Allegations or insinuations are made based on supposed evidence that cannot be shared.  When that evidence is shared and not only does not prove the allegations but actually disproves them, suddenly it's a case of "ah, it's not those messages, we meant these other messages".

As always with this saga, lets see where it all leads to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, aaid said:

I saw this last night.  Seems only to be Craig Murray saying this at present.  I checked a few Scottish political journalists who are saying nothing which would appear to suggest there's nothing to it.

In fact, just double checking to see if there had been any movement and I see this has just been published in the Guardian which suggests the opposite.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/12/msps-dismiss-claims-nicola-sturgeons-husband-conspired-to-destroy-alex-salmond

Craig Murray seems to be getting his information from Salmond or his proxies and this has been a constant theme from that side.  Allegations or insinuations are made based on supposed evidence that cannot be shared.  When that evidence is shared and not only does not prove the allegations but actually disproves them, suddenly it's a case of "ah, it's not those messages, we meant these other messages".

As always with this saga, lets see where it all leads to.

It certainly seems that Salmond is using intermediaries to deliver his messages! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lamia said:

It certainly seems that Salmond is using intermediaries to deliver his messages! 

He should stick to Tesco for getting his messages delivered.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lamia said:

I think that some of this is similar to the fear parents have letting kids have any freedom. It hasn't suddenly got more dangerous it is just perceptions have changed. I must admit that there have been times I have felt a sense of fear and wouldn't walk certain places but I recognise that isn't based on any evidence and nothing has happened to make me feel this way.

I have had certain unwanted behaviour over the year but that has generally revolved around pubs and alcohol.

Of the people I know it is the men who have been attacked and I am pretty sure there are places they are at risk walking by themselves.

I don't dismiss the issue entirely because it does exist but the real problem is with people known to women. They are the ones more likely to be the danger. I believe men are more at risk from strangers.

The other thing that jars with me is why this particular case is getting so much attention. One reason with be that the suspect is a policeman but I can't help think it is because the victim is  a white middle class woman. There are many other victims who don't matter because they are not part of this demograph and it is shameful that no one really cares when it happens to them.

I think you are right Lamia in linking kids lack of freedom with a general perception of fear. . It doesn’t help with so much emphasis being put on tablets and computer games which keep kids in the house rather getting used to being outdoors and the obstacles that they encounter , and overcome , which helps build up confidence. 

I think where you live also plays a big part in how you feel about walking out alone. Without a doubt I would feel safer going out where I live than in London for example.

That said, although  I generally dont feel worried at all being out myself the vast majority of the time,  there was a situation a few months ago  i was out running on the cycle track and there was only one other person on it. It was a guy that was walking towards me and he suddenly started jogging as he was getting closer. He was dressed in jeans and a padded jacket , so not clothes that you would wear if you were out running. It was the middle of the day but I was quite scared. There are embankments either side of the track and all I could think of was he could push me down easily and no one would notice as the cycle track is quite a bit off any main road, its only fields either side. I was also knackered and knew there was no way i could out run him. 
As it happens the bloke just run past me and I then felt so guilty as he was just a normal guy and I had him as a potential rapist . It was the middle of the day and when I thought about it logically, although he was the only one on the track at that time there was a good chance a cyclist would appear anytime as it is quite a popular track , and no one would take the chance of that happening and being caught.

I am not undermining women’s concerns about their safety, after all in Sarah Everard’s case being ( allegedly) attacked by the very people who are there to protect you is very concerning. But generally I think people can sometimes confuse irrational fear with real reasons to be fearful and perhaps makes the situation seem a lot worse than it really is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, phart said:

General point.

It's really hard to get a representative sample.

It's why physics is such a succesful discipline compared to others. You're looking at homogenous "simple" behaving subjects and even then it becomes a mathmatical nightmare really quickly.

Add in something as complex as humans and it basically becomes an educated guessing game.

Specific point.

Looks like they have fudged that by inappropriately taking more from a pool that isn't representative of the mean/whole.

It 'looks' not right but I don't know if it is significant or newsworthy or not

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, exile said:

It 'looks' not right but I don't know if it is significant or newsworthy or not

Well as Aaid points out as long as it's weighted correctly you can correct for the error. I assumed it as presented but seems weighting then goes into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, phart said:

The original point was totally fair in response to the police suggestion. I don't agree with women forgetting about the lassie, for some reason this has really resonated in a deeply profound way as opposed to just being the useful social media led 2 day event.

The SNP has had several people who just don't align with my views at all. Starting from how they were funded for a very long time, right up to the expansion period where they suddenly became attractive for a lot of people. I haven't voted for them for a long long time. I am swithering on just going 2 votes for them this time and seeing where that goes.

Baroness Jones was just trying to show how ridiculous proposing a curfew on females (as had been suggested) would be. I agree with her there - what reasonable person wouldn't?  What irked me were people - probably deliberately - misinterpreting her comment to pursue their own prejudices. 

I agree that it has resonated with a lot of people, as did George Floyd's death, and you don't hear too much about him anymore. I think it's possibly an effect of lockdown: people's ordinary lives have been curtailed and so events effecting other people are magnified, through the media, and take on a greater prominence.

As for the SNP, I guess what we're seeing is the result of a party which essentially exists for one goal. Save for the belief that Scotland should be an independent country, the party includes people who wouldn't in ordinary circumstances ever be in the same political party. 

I've always believed that when or if independence is ever achieved they will cease to exist as we know them today. They're already showing signs of pulling apart; unfortunately this is happening before their core aim has been realised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...