Waterstones - the end in sight?

[scottycelt]

As a catholic, scotty, surely you do not fall for protestant individualism? Justice and equality are a communal matter - they can't just be applied to individuals.

I have a smidgen of sympathy for you being cold called with a heavy sell based on moral persuasion, but none at all for your views on "liberals".

Don, surely the true 'liberal' and egalitarian is the one who says that aid should be directed at the most needy and not based on stereotypical views on gender, favouring one at the expense of the other?

Many today who call themselves 'liberals' are just as dogmatic about their beliefs and can be as intolerant of others as the rest of us. This Forum is surely testament to that!

[Flosshilde]

Isn't this why it often ends up going to women and children?

Yes, I haven't a problem with that at all ... it often will and should.

However, that is a quite different thing from saying (as Floss seems to suggest) that it should only go to women.

Can you direct me to the post where I even seemed to suggest that?

[Flosshilde]

I'm rather staggered to note that you're now an apparently enthusiastic advocate for CAFOD, Floss ...

Why do you make that assumption? I was merely pointing out (one of) the contradictions in the fact that you'd used CAFOD as an example. I'm sure that CAFOD does do good work; unfortunately its policies on contraception & HIV prevention cast a cloud over it.

I do not doubt for one second the miserable existence of huge numbers of women in Africa and elsewhere in the world, and the humane desirability of attempting to improve their lot.

I will take that comment at face value; what you do seem to doubt is the practical steps needed to improve that existence.

You will note that one of your links also points out the stereotyping of males (mostly by 'liberals' and feminists) which also gets in the way of making life a bit easier for the poor and underprivileged. Many millions of African men and, of course, kiddies also live in miserable conditions if they manage to survive at all.

That's your interpolation - the quote doesn't specify who creates it. Such stereotypee are as much created and sustained by the people who are stereotyped, because it's part of their self-image. And you presumably didn't notice that the specific reason for given for working with men was because "stereotyping men restricts their freedom to involve women and share power and influence".

When to comes to aid, surely it should be directed at the most needy irrespective of gender?

That is what I call real and truly genuine equality!

I quite agree; so does CAFOD, and as it says on the web page I referred you to, women are generally poorer than men, as well as being socially more disadvantaged. In terms of effective and best use of resources it makes sense to support women.

[scottycelt]

Can you direct me to the post where I even seemed to suggest that?

#65
#77

That's certainly what I understood from both posts.

If that was not your intention then, God forbid, I can only assume that you actually agree with me after all ... ?

[Flosshilde]

Don, surely the true 'liberal' and egalitarian is the one who says that aid should be directed at the most needy and not based on stereotypical views on gender, favouring one at the expense of the other?

The practices of OXFAM, CAFOD, and many other charitable & other aid agencies are not based on "stereotypical views on gender", but on real, practical experience built up over many years in the field working on projects that have a real impact on peoples lives.

But all this argument, supported by evidence, is pointless, isn't it? You're happy with your stereotyped view of what charity should be, & you aren't prepared to change.

[Flosshilde]

#65
#77

That's certainly what I understood from both posts.

If that was not your intention then, God forbid, I can only assume that you actually agree with me after all ... ?

No, I don't see anything in either of those posts that say that I think aid should only go to women - perhaps you'd like to elucidate?

[scottycelt]

You're happy with your stereotyped view of what charity should be, & you aren't prepared to change.

Oh, yes, we all know about silly, silly old me, but am I really the only one ... ?

[Flosshilde]

No indeed, but the main other one hasn't posted here for a while.

[scottycelt]

No, I don't see anything in either of those posts that say that I think aid should only go to women - perhaps you'd like to elucidate?

Well, anyone here can read the posts for themselves and draw their own conclusions ... I can only offer you my own.

If you didn't mean what you appeared to infer then, I repeat, to all intents and purposes we actually agree with each other.

Is that a particular problem ... ?

[amateur51]

The practices of OXFAM, CAFOD, and many other charitable & other aid agencies are not based on "stereotypical views on gender", but on real, practical experience built up over many years in the field working on projects that have a real impact on peoples lives.

But all this argument, supported by evidence, is pointless, isn't it? You're happy with your stereotyped view of what charity should be, & you aren't prepared to change.

Spot on, Flossie!

One of the great changes in the last 25 years has been that aid agencies have been encouraged by their funders to learn the lessons from their work and to disseminate that learning more widely, to peer agencies and to governments in an attempt to make the money work harder and also to ensure that there is little/no reinventing the wheel.

There is abundant evidence to support the bias towards funding work with women in some cases and towards work around HIV and AIDS. Scotty does not want to hear it because he knows better - the Sage of Partick Thistle knows that it's all a conspiracy by liberal feminists against men

[Flosshilde]

Well, anyone here can read the posts for themselves and draw their own conclusions ... I can only offer you my own.

If you didn't mean what you appeared to infer then, I repeat, to all intents and purposes we actually agree with each other.

Is that a particular problem ... ?

I don't suppose that anyone else is terribly interested. I was actually having a discussion with you (I thought).

[scottycelt]

the Sage of Partick Thistle knows that it's all a conspiracy by liberal feminists against men

If you had ever watched Partick Thistle you might be only too willing to buy the theory, Amateur51 ...

[scottycelt]

I don't suppose that anyone else is terribly interested. I was actually having a discussion with you (I thought).

Don't be so possessive, Flossie ... I need some space to consider all the other men (and women) in my life ...

[Don Basilio]

Don, surely the true 'liberal' and egalitarian is the one who says that aid should be directed at the most needy and not based on stereotypical views on gender, favouring one at the expense of the other?

Many today who call themselves 'liberals' are just as dogmatic about their beliefs and can be as intolerant of others as the rest of us. This Forum is surely testament to that!

"LIBERAL" is a word that means different things in different situations - I'm certainly not a liberal when it comes to the eucharist. Mrs Thatcher was an economic liberal. So don't use it as catchall term of condemnation.

[Flosshilde]

I wouldn't know about being a liberal in relation to the eucharist, Don, but Mrs Thatcher an economic liberal? I would have said that she was a libertarian.