Jessica23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 read the thread again:) When people said she was wasting Parliamentary time, I pointed that it took two minutes. (Kerry McCarthy's blog post that Bloomdido linked to made a similar point.) The bar forms part of the workplace, either because you accept that it's on site at the House of Commons or because you accept that people work there, i.e. the bar staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 From the fog of confusion and contradiction that have been your posts go on then, show how you concluded that I thought bar staff were idiots:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 When people said she was wasting Parliamentary time, I pointed that it took two minutes. (Kerry McCarthy's blog post that Bloomdido linked to made a similar point.) The bar forms part of the workplace, either because you accept that it's on site at the House of Commons or because you accept that people work there, i.e. the bar staff. It is a bar that is used for recreation, whether it is in the house of commons or not. Bar staff work in the leisure industry so different rules should and do apply to office staff. I don't care how long it took, that makes it slightly more acceptable but is irrelevant to what I asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 go on then, show how you concluded that I thought bar staff were idiots:hihi:That minor point was added to my post. The real point was the 1st, which you answered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 because you were working in the leisure industry-different things are appropriate in a bar to in an office. Surely you can't be arguing with that:loopy: What's with the endless loopy smilies? I am arguing that people who work in an office or bar are entitled to be treated with respect and not leered at, not have their personal space invaded and not be exposed to images and language that convey a message that women are sexual objects. your point being? My criteria for what I want in a job do not have to be the same as yours-jeez! My point being that it is not just bar staff who have to work with 'drunk idiots'. I never said anything at all about my criteria for what I want in a job. From the fog of confusion and contradiction that have been your posts What he says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 read the thread again:) Then put all those points you just made back on yourself. I am allowed an opinion and I don't deny your right to opinion but I do deny you the right to decide that my opinion is wrong! My opinion is that you're wrong; and even if you weren't wrong, the fact that you're so quick to resort to insults at the first opportunity undermines your arguments. Or what passes for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 It does seem slightly prejudiced if you're in favour of slightly more mature or less slender ladies being photographed nude other than a basket of fruit and a couple of cakes keeping their modesty, but then being hyper sensitive about slender young females being photographed showing no more or less flesh but in different attire, perhaps a bikini. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 What's with the endless loopy smilies? I am arguing that people who work in an office or bar are entitled to be treated with respect and not leered at, not have their personal space invaded and not exposed be to images that convey a message that women are sexual objects. My point being that it is not just bar staff who have to work with 'drunk idiots'. I never said anything at all about my criteria for what I want in a job. What he says. 1) I am arguing on your level:) 2) I agree that everyone should be treated with respect and not leered at particularly at work, I believe most people can look at a cartoon of a woman without drooling and turning into a sexual predator. Give people some credit! 3) You seem to be disparaging me for not wanting to deal with drunken idiots during my working day-otherwise you would have had no reason to comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 My opinion is that you're wrong; and even if you weren't wrong, the fact that you're so quick to resort to insults at the first opportunity undermines your arguments. Or what passes for them. I didn't resort to insults until the "unenlightened" etc comments! Again throw that comment your way. By your way I may only mean suffragette here, without rereading I am not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I didn't resort to insults until the "unenlightened" etc comments! Again throw that comment your way. You called Kate Green a numpty on page 4 of this thread. Searching for 'unenlightened' on this thread brings up three of your posts. No one else's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.