• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Four days a week, please"

Collapse

  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post

    True. Most Italians would be offended by the prospect of a cappuccino after breakfast time.
    Cappuccino has been cancelled. It's now called 'ones choice of beverage'

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post

    Isn't that socio-economist'ist? Assuming they are posh enough to drink cappuccino could be deemed offensive.
    True. Most Italians would be offended by the prospect of a cappuccino after breakfast time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zigenare
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post

    Isn't that socio-economist'ist? Assuming they are posh enough to drink cappuccino could be deemed offensive.
    Someone/thing would most probably be offended!

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    What you have to do is check with the person you are interacting with what their definition is and then tailor your conversation with that person accordingly. Once everyone understands everyone's individual definition (regardless of whether you agree with it) it's then possible to discuss whether they'd like a dusting of chocolate on their cappuccino.
    Isn't that socio-economist'ist? Assuming they are posh enough to drink cappuccino could be deemed offensive.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    What you have to do is check with the person you are interacting with what their definition is and then tailor your conversation with that person accordingly. Once everyone understands everyone's individual definition (regardless of whether you agree with it) it's then possible to discuss whether they'd like a dusting of chocolate on their cappuccino.
    ladymuck for PM!!

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    What you have to do is check with the person you are interacting with what their definition is and then tailor your conversation with that person accordingly. Once everyone understands everyone's individual definition (regardless of whether you agree with it) it's then possible to discuss whether they'd like a dusting of chocolate on their cappuccino.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by Paralytic View Post

    Answering "what is a woman" is not the same as defining other people.
    Agreed. There has to be a base definition of something before you go defining other people based on definitions. Now there isn't a single definition for the original woman it's very difficult to discuss and understand anymore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paralytic
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    As a whitecismale(!) I know better than to fall into this trap of defining a woman, you can't just go round defining other people these days you know.
    Answering "what is a woman" is not the same as defining other people.

    Leave a comment:


  • DoctorStrangelove
    replied
    Stone me, I remember the five and a half day week: early closing day for shops* on a Thursday. 44 hours a week.


    *There were regulations re opening hours. Closed completely on Sunday. I remember a chap being prosecuted for refilling his cigarette machine on a Sunday.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by Zigenare View Post

    Define "women"...
    As a whitecismale(!) I know better than to fall into this trap of defining a woman, you can't just go round defining other people these days you know.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zigenare
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    oh I do like a bit of pansexual!
    I was more into Pan's People - Showing my age, I know...

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by tazdevil View Post

    Nah still Biological females or a person with XX chromosomes. You can't define biological reality away however woke you are If people want to think themselves what they're not then that's fine but like all disorders it's probably a mental thing to pretend to be a none binary popty ping or whatever
    oh I do like a bit of pansexual!

    Leave a comment:


  • WaltZucher
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
    I'm sure that when working days went down from 6 days a week to 5, similar arguments were made. Yet here we are. Interesting that the nay sayers don't propose a 6 (or 7) day working week.
    It's true that when working days were reduced from 6 days a week to 5, there were likely similar arguments made about the negative impact it would have on productivity or the economy. However, as you pointed out, we have adjusted to this change and it has become the norm. It's also interesting to note that the "nay sayers" who argue against reducing the workweek don't typically propose a longer workweek, as you mentioned. Instead, they tend to argue that shorter workweeks will lead to reduced productivity or economic growth. However, there is evidence to suggest that working longer hours does not necessarily lead to higher productivity, and that a shorter workweek may actually lead to improved productivity and job satisfaction. Ultimately, it's important to consider the well-being of workers and their ability to maintain a healthy work-life balance, as well as the potential benefits that a shorter workweek could bring.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    Sorry but it doesn't matter how many women you put together, they aren't getting pregnant.
    Depends if you are in a Scottish Prison or an Olympic swimmer.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by Zigenare View Post
    Crickey, dangerous stuff that is. So there is now no longer a definition for a biological human being with two X chromosones, and adult human female, a biological woman that is of the nature to get pregnant or whatever definition it is, there is no longer a term for that distinct group. That's pretty unheard of. We have a name/definition for absolutely everything in the world but now not for a woman that means the desciptions above. That's pretty staggering tbf.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X