new horizons

Wow Wombat - sounds like he is safe from you for as long as he stays in the UK. For the record I have agreed with everything you have posted and everything you will post!!
Please don't turn your guns on me - a mere pathetic male brit - aussie caught up in this Oz - Brit conflict.

Quinkana

Wombat: your sarcasm is definitely on the improve - practice makes perfect.

heraldic

Wombat my mummy is in sydney -one of the reasons I am going back. I need to protect her from a beastly convict -my dad (just joking)

wombat42

Don't worry my guns are pointed at Heraldick and Stanton for the moment.

Mercedes

Since you keep going on about he macho men in Oz, this report is also quite interesting in the UK..

One in two young men think rape may be acceptable in certain circumstances and a quarter think it justifiable to hit a woman, according to a report.

The research by the Zero Tolerance Charitable Trust also reveals one in three girls believe forcing a woman to have sex can be acceptable.

Glasgow and North London university academics surveyed 2,039 young people aged 14 to 21 in Manchester, Glasgow and Fife on behalf of the trust.

The researchers found one in five young men thought forcing their wives to have sex would be acceptable, while one in seven agreed it would be justifiable in a long-term relationship.

The survey also revealed a worrying attitude to violence

One in 10 thought there was nothing wrong with raping a woman if the man was "so turned on he can't stop", while one in six said "if she'd slept with loads of men" was a valid reason.

One in six of the boys questioned thought they might personally force a woman to have sex with them, while nearly one in 10 would rape a woman "if nobody would find out".

The results of mean half of all those surveyed believe rape to be acceptable in some circumstances.

Only two-thirds of the young men surveyed were sure they would not force a woman to have sex.

In comparison one in three women thought it was acceptable under certain circumstances for a man to force a woman into sex.

Sheila Barton, one of the North London University researchers involved in the study, said the results were shocking.

Attitudes towards violence towards women were also investigated and revealed that one in four young men thought hitting a woman could be justified if she had "slept with someone else".

And one in eight said it would be OK to hit a "nagging" woman, while one in 10 said hitting a "disrespectful" woman was justified.

new horizons

No-one likes violence whether it is perpetrated to men or women including sexual violence but be cautious of studies that may have a hidden "anti- men" agenda. Sadly it does seem like it is open season on all persons born with male genitalia for these type of studies often conducted by persons who wish to perpetuate a myth of men in general being bastards.
Having worked for many years with such persons or groups I learnt two important factors - deduce the hidden (sometimes not even hidden) motivation and always remember that questions, answers and the analysis of same can be skewed to reach almost any outcome.
Sorry ladies but many men, including me, are getting very tiresome of this perpetual man bashing. I accept there are some terrible males out there (as indeed there are females) but the blanket is appearing to cover all of us. Just for one minute imagine the hue and cry if studies showed women in a derogatory light on such a constant basis or if they attacked the ethnic or religious groups in the same manner.
Sadly much of this anti-male momentum is facilitated by weak bureaucratic males or progressive left wing males within academia who aren't strong enough or principled enough to stem the tide or to question the methodologies. To openly question the motives and methodolgy of such studies would be attacked as not politically correct hence the career minded opportunist male bureaucrates fail in their duty to the public.

ABCDiamond

This post deserves Karma

As most "sensible" people realise, there is good, and bad, in both countries.

Trevglas

There probably is an incredibly greater number of breath tests here, mainly because random breath testing is allowed. Quite often the police will stop everybody going up a road and breath test them.

In the UK, a breath test may only, I believe, be performed for a moving traffic violation.

In terms of attitude to drink driving, the AU attitude is still pretty much where it was in the UK 10 or so years ago, ie if you get done for drunk driving, you were unlucky, and the police should pick on real criminals rather than the (more correct) attitude of being a total a***hole for drink driving in the first place.

mlbonner

(Unfortunately) sad but very true

worzel

Australia is not behind the Uk, it is 11 hours ahead (in Sydney)

OzTennis

In my previous posts I said I was referring to maternity leave for female teachers. The guarantee of a job 7 years down the line may encourage female teachers to bring up their child rather than rush back to work (it did in the case of my sister-in-law and other friends). True, the availability of free child care places may encourage some female teachers to go back to work soon after having a child but at least if you want to stay at home with your child until they go to school you can, you have a choice - knowing there is a job to go back to. I also said in reply to someone who asked about what other occupations it applied to that I wasn't sure and my comment you re-typed was about the occupation I knew about.

(BTW 5 or 6 weeks spent in Oz every year and next time I speak to my sister-in-law I'll tell her you've changed the maternity leave rules)

OzTennis

jad n rich

Right so now your comments referred to female teachers, so a few thousand women get those rights, we both know the benefits of teachers apply to few other professions in australia.

My comments refer to australias 2,700,000 unemployed working age adults who scam free childcare even tho tho they dont bother to work, an expensive rort which hopefully the government will be unobstructed in changing.

Everybody clear now

Quinkana

Perhaps you mean "2.7 million working-age Australians currently on welfare payments":

Unemployed may lose welfare

OzTennis

Yeah, I'm clear and please also note that I didn't call your comments out of date or bollocks!

On the issue you raise, which I didn't, I suspect the thinking behind giving free child care to the unemployed (obviously not 2.7 mill but those unemployed with children of pre-school age) was to make it possible for them to seek work if they want? You can lead a horse to water but ..... Some unemployed persons genuinely want to work and if barriers hindering them finding work can be lowered then all well and good I say.

I dare say the unemployed will contain a fair share of single mothers, those with unsuitable/few/out of date qualifications, people between jobs, people who have been retrenched because the firm or industry is in trouble, the older worker, seasonal workers, the physically handicapped, those with disabilities, women, ethnic minorities, the young with no experience, those in prison or mental institutions etc, etc - as well as the 'scammers' and the 'work shy'.

Many different groups probably requiring different solutions and policies. I'd like to see reliable stats on what proportion of the unemployed are in this category of bleeding the system. If you think longer term the cost of providing someone with free child care who later goes on to find work will be less than the income tax and GST etc that person will pay the government so view the investment in child care as giving society a return.

In any country, labelling ALL the unemployed as 'work shy' or 'scammers' is a too simplistic but I would certainly be in favour of removing free child care (except on 'job search' or re-training days or for health reasons) providing it can be proved that someone is in this category (not easy though as it isn't easy to pretend to be looking for work to satisfy some criteria for drawing a benefit - but not all the unemployed do this).

The culture of blaming the unemployed for being out of work is not particularly helpful - there are far more unemployed than there are job vacancies! Are we saying that if all the unemployed wanted to work they would all be in a job? (and I'm not saying there aren't large numbers who don't want to work, just don't tar everyone with the same brush). Or, would those in work be prepared to take a pay cut to create more jobs because employers are looking to shed jobs and cut costs where possible?

A very complex issue!

OzTennis

Mercedes

The male bashing came from Stanton a male on Ozzie males. Women's view on rape is also interesting so it wasn't just men's views.

>In comparison one in three women thought it was acceptable under certain circumstances for a man to force a woman into sex.>