https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/

Suzanne Moore column:

London Bridge is quite a confusing station. So many exits and so many
entrances. There is a massive number of platforms and sometimes services
suddenly move from one platform to another, so you have to dash right
across the station. Sometimes you look in vain for staff to help you, and
sometimes when you find them, they say things like, “Your guess is as good
as mine, love.”

Call me a basic b**** but what I require of Network Rail is trains running
on schedule, clear signposting, assistance for those who need it, and to
feel safe on trains and at stations.

At the moment none of this is happening. British Transport Police estimate
that more than a third of female customers have been sexually harassed or
actually had offences committed against them on the Tube or train. In
short, women do not feel safe. For this, we need more staff visible and
present.

Network Rail were also fined £6.7 million for a crash in 2020 because of
myriad safety failings.

When I say safe, I mean I don’t want to be attacked, mugged or harassed.
But it has never occurred to me that Network Rail is there to affirm my
vague sense of sexual identity or to applaud either the number of mine or
anyone else’s sexual partners, their relationship status, or their complete
lack of interest in the whole shebang. That is frankly weird. And
intrusive.

So to see a picture of five white blokes – I am calling them blokes but
they may well self-ID as non-blokes, but I have as much faith in that as I
do in a bus replacement service – standing by a weird concrete column
plastered in flags described as their “Pride Pillar” is bizarre.

What is a Pride Pillar and how have we managed so long without one? It is a
bit of fat concrete, covered with a collection of the new-fangled flags
that even the most dedicated purveyor of micro-identity politics would be
hard-pressed to recognise.

There is the ever-present rainbow flag. Cool, most of us have the hang of
that. Then there is the Intersex Progress Pride Flag with triangles and
circles, and a whole bunch of others. There are flags representing
trans-allyship, the flag of polyamory, its yellow Pi sign indicating the
infinite possibilities of having an infinite number of sexual partners.
There is a gender fluid flag. There is a flag for people who don’t have
romantic feelings and a flag for people who only want to have sex with
those that they do have romantic feelings for, demisexuals in the new
parlance.
Never mind the aesthetics of this - and I do actually always think, “Pink
and blue for the trans flag? Really? Please let us be a little less
stereotypical, a little more imaginative” - but what are the actual ethics
of spending money on this?

Do rail passengers now feel London Bridge station understands their sexual
confusion even though their train has just been cancelled? Will some feel
left out? Where is the two-spirit flag? Where is the representation for
sapiosexuals, those who only feel attracted to someone because of their
intelligence? Have they tended to the poor, overlooked asexuals who never
fancy anyone, or is that one hidden round the back?

All of this faff is apparently to symbolise, according the station manager
Cem Davies, that the station is an inclusive place to be in and work in.
Rightio! It turns out one of the blokes most proud of the Pride Pillar,
Shane Andrews MBE, has an unfortunate history of tweeting utterly vile
remarks about women. None of this comes as any great surprise to those of
us who have watched the dullard embrace of this kind of activism.

The one thing that these guys do not care about are the rights, safety and
experience of women - that is so old hat. So many corporates signal their
progressive intentions by embracing this performative flag-waving instead
of addressing actual issues of inequality and discrimination in the
workplace.

We have seen in the recent slew of tribunal cases, from gender-critical
social worker Rachel Meade to academic Jo Phoenix, who said she was forced
to quit her job at the Open University after a backlash against her
gender-critical beliefs, that what is done in the name of “inclusion” is
its very opposite. In this doublespeak, inclusion now means paying lip
service to an ideology that many of us never bought into in the first
place. If you don’t, you will be excommunicated.

I am not so much intimidated by these inane flags as bored by them. They
are symbols not of sexual freedom but of narcissism passed off as some kind
of radicalism.

Who I fancy or don’t fancy is frankly none of anyone’s business, least of
all Network Rail’s. I don’t need that affirmation in a train station. I
need the trains to run on time, I need lifts to work for friends in
wheelchairs, I need enough staff around to ensure that women feel safe at
night.

This Pride column is but sound and fury signifying nothing. Where is the
flag for self-righteousness when you need it? Surely someone can design
one.

[The article includes some explanatory illustrations]

In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>committed against them on the Tube or train.

This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
marketing professional for that.

My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
so was easily able to explain this to me.

ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>committed against them on the Tube or train.
>
>This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>marketing professional for that.

So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.

>My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
>so was easily able to explain this to me.
>
>ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
> to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.

In general, but I suspect that changes when you're talking about trains
unless you think there are frequent family bust ups on public transport.

On 30.01.2024 14:22, Recliner wrote:
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/
>
> Suzanne Moore column:

<snip>

straight white boomer snowflake rants about how her delicate feelings
are being hurt by having her little middle class heteronormative bubble
intruded on by a few colourful symbols by those nasty gays and other
people Not Like Her, people she wish would just go back to a life of
persecution in the closet like they used to be when she was young and
could pretend to be socially progressive.

But it happened in a railway station, so it therefore gets to have a
couple of paragraphs about generic "railway stations are confusing and
understaffed" tacked on, to make it all OK.

Robin

On 30/01/2024 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>
> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
> marketing professional for that.
>
> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>
> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.

People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
sexual offences against them.

On 30/01/2024 13:22, Recliner wrote:
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/

A while ago I saw the Telegraph described as a bunch of internet savvy
young people publishing things they think will wind up the inmates of
their grandad's care home.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 30.01.2024 19:57, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 30/01/2024 13:22, Recliner wrote:
>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/
>
> A while ago I saw the Telegraph described as a bunch of internet savvy
> young people publishing things they think will wind up the inmates of
> their grandad's care home.

I can well imagine that being the case at an editorial level. The byline
on that article, though, shows that it was written by a 65 year old
whose educational attainment was dropping out of school at 16, later
taking a degree in "cultural studies" ad Middlesex Poly, and generally
stoking outrage by using her position in journalism to write
trans-exclusionary feminist type diatribles such as the one linked.

Robin

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 16:27:35 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 30/01/2024 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>
>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>> marketing professional for that.
>>
>> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
>> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>>
>> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.
>
>People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>sexual offences against them.

Yes, but Roland's point is valid here. If you travel by train a lot, then,
purely as matter of random chance, something nasty is probably going to
happen to you at least once while you're on the train. So if you ask a lot
of people "Have you ever...?", then the answer for most of them will be
"yes". But that, alone, tells you nothing about how often it happens. And
it's how often it happens, not how many people it's happened to, which is
the important metric.

I've had an offence committed against me on the train (theft, as it
happens). But it only happened the once, and I've used the train a fair bit
in my lifetime (including a period in the 90s when I was commuting to work
by train and tube). So, statistically, that's actually a pretty good record,
not a bad one. I appreciate that I'm not likely to be a victim of the kind
of offences that are typically committed against women (groping, flashing,
etc), so it would be equally wrong to extrapolate from my experience to
theirs. But, still, there's a big, and extremely important difference
between "I once got flashed on the tube" and "I see flashers on the tube
every week". The latter would be a genuine cause for concern. But the former
probably isn't, if it's a single atypical data point.

Mark

In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>
>>This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>marketing professional for that.
>
>So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.

Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree course,
after all.
--
Roland Perry

In message <upb81o$128gb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:27:35 on Tue, 30 Jan
2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>On 30/01/2024 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>committed against them on the Tube or train.

>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>> marketing professional for that.

>> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
>> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.
>
>People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>sexual offences against them.

Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be easy.
--
Roland Perry

On 30/01/2024 20:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>> People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>> sexual offences against them.
>
> Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be easy.

It seems obvious that someone wanting to commit an assault on public
transport is likely to pick a random stranger so less chance of being
identified.

On 30.01.2024 14:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>
> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
> marketing professional for that.
>
> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>
> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.

It really depends on what sort of acts are being considered. If you
consider acts that cross the threshold of, say, taking off of clothes
and skin-on-skin contact, then yes, those sorts of acts are very much
less common between strangers than they are between people who to at
least some extent know one another.

Sexual harassment and assault, however, also includes a range of things
that are not of this nature, such as inappropriate touching (wandering
hands) or language of a sexual nature that makes the other person feel
threatened or uncomfortable. These latter sorts of things are much more
commonly done between strangers (in my younger years, I've been on late
night trains where groups of rowdy drunken people have loudly made lewd
comments about fellow passengers that would meet the threshold for
sexual harassment, coming from and targetting both sexes).

There is also a significant gender bias both socially and withing
policing circles. A given act by a man against a woman is likely to be
taken far more seriously than the same act by a woman against a man,
meaning rates of reporting and recording relative to the underlying
rates of what actually takes place, will show a signifiant distortion
along gender lines.

Robin

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 20:38:32 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
>2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>>
>>>This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>>know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>>marketing professional for that.
>>
>>So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.
>
>Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree course,
>after all.

So is art history but I doubt they end up as stats experts either.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 20:39:49 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>In message <upb81o$128gb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:27:35 on Tue, 30 Jan
>2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>On 30/01/2024 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>committed against them on the Tube or train.
>
>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>> marketing professional for that.
>
>>> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
>>> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>>> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>>>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.
>>
>>People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>>sexual offences against them.
>
>Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be easy.

I know Coffee's right and so do you. I don't have a degree in
statistics but it's bloody obvious. Of course the vast majority of
this type of offence is (objectively) low level, unreported, and
perpetrated by strangers. I don't see why you'd think of questioning
it unless for the sake of an argument.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 22:09:10 +0000, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 30/01/2024 20:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>>> sexual offences against them.
>>
>> Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be easy.
>
>
>It seems obvious that someone wanting to commit an assault on public
>transport is likely to pick a random stranger so less chance of being
>identified.
I expect it's different in Ely.

On 30/01/2024 20:38, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
> 2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>>
>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>> marketing professional for that.
>>
>> So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.
>
> Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree course,
> after all.

Isn't journalism a three year degree plus post grad in journalism?
--
Arthur Figgis

On 30/01/2024 20:34, Mark Goodge wrote:

> Yes, but Roland's point is valid here. If you travel by train a lot, then,
> purely as matter of random chance, something nasty is probably going to
> happen to you at least once while you're on the train.

When I was a kid, it was well known that the kids who walked or cycled
to school were trouble-causers. Every single incident of supposedly
unprovoked violence at the school gates involved a kid who walked or
cycled, and never someone who had been picked up by their mum and driven
home.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 31/01/2024 21:27, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 30/01/2024 20:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
>> 2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>>>
>>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>>> marketing professional for that.
>>>
>>> So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.
>>
>> Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree
>> course, after all.
>
> Isn't journalism a three year degree plus post grad in journalism?

Depends…
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 30/01/2024 13:22, Recliner wrote:
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/
>
> Suzanne Moore column:
>
> London Bridge is quite a confusing station. So many exits and so many
> entrances. There is a massive number of platforms and sometimes services
> suddenly move from one platform to another, so you have to dash right
> across the station. Sometimes you look in vain for staff to help you, and
> sometimes when you find them, they say things like, “Your guess is as good
> as mine, love.”
>
> Call me a basic b**** but what I require of Network Rail is trains running
> on schedule, clear signposting, assistance for those who need it, and to
> feel safe on trains and at stations.
>
> At the moment none of this is happening. British Transport Police estimate
> that more than a third of female customers have been sexually harassed or
> actually had offences committed against them on the Tube or train. In
> short, women do not feel safe. For this, we need more staff visible and
> present.
>
> Network Rail were also fined £6.7 million for a crash in 2020 because of
> myriad safety failings.
>
> When I say safe, I mean I don’t want to be attacked, mugged or harassed.
> But it has never occurred to me that Network Rail is there to affirm my
> vague sense of sexual identity or to applaud either the number of mine or
> anyone else’s sexual partners, their relationship status, or their complete
> lack of interest in the whole shebang. That is frankly weird. And
> intrusive.
>
> So to see a picture of five white blokes – I am calling them blokes but
> they may well self-ID as non-blokes, but I have as much faith in that as I
> do in a bus replacement service – standing by a weird concrete column
> plastered in flags described as their “Pride Pillar” is bizarre.
>
> What is a Pride Pillar and how have we managed so long without one? It is a
> bit of fat concrete, covered with a collection of the new-fangled flags
> that even the most dedicated purveyor of micro-identity politics would be
> hard-pressed to recognise.
>
> There is the ever-present rainbow flag. Cool, most of us have the hang of
> that. Then there is the Intersex Progress Pride Flag with triangles and
> circles, and a whole bunch of others. There are flags representing
> trans-allyship, the flag of polyamory, its yellow Pi sign indicating the
> infinite possibilities of having an infinite number of sexual partners.
> There is a gender fluid flag. There is a flag for people who don’t have
> romantic feelings and a flag for people who only want to have sex with
> those that they do have romantic feelings for, demisexuals in the new
> parlance.
>
> Never mind the aesthetics of this - and I do actually always think, “Pink
> and blue for the trans flag? Really? Please let us be a little less
> stereotypical, a little more imaginative” - but what are the actual ethics
> of spending money on this?
>
> Do rail passengers now feel London Bridge station understands their sexual
> confusion even though their train has just been cancelled? Will some feel
> left out? Where is the two-spirit flag? Where is the representation for
> sapiosexuals, those who only feel attracted to someone because of their
> intelligence? Have they tended to the poor, overlooked asexuals who never
> fancy anyone, or is that one hidden round the back?
>
> All of this faff is apparently to symbolise, according the station manager
> Cem Davies, that the station is an inclusive place to be in and work in.
> Rightio! It turns out one of the blokes most proud of the Pride Pillar,
> Shane Andrews MBE, has an unfortunate history of tweeting utterly vile
> remarks about women. None of this comes as any great surprise to those of
> us who have watched the dullard embrace of this kind of activism.
>

Surely NR should be spending its scarce funds on more useful things than
so-called artwork?

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 21:38:12 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 31/01/2024 21:27, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 30/01/2024 20:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
>>> 2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>>> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>>> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>>>> marketing professional for that.
>>>>
>>>> So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.
>>>
>>> Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree
>>> course, after all.
>>
>> Isn't journalism a three year degree plus post grad in journalism?
>
>Depends…

That comment in *North American* terms sums up the condition of
acceptance for serious journalism: the only people who seem to care
are olde and need, um... Depends.

The un-smart screen-gazers constantly blocking
walkways/doors/footpaths believe bloggers, influencers, and video
tickers who certainly do not have even a year to their credential
claim.

What's a newspaper? Or non-fluff television? And radio? (What's
that...)

<sigh>

[Waiting with Tom and Diana, while being tended by Jane. Oh, Gawd!]

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 21:34:59 +0000, Arthur Figgis
<afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:

>On 30/01/2024 20:34, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> Yes, but Roland's point is valid here. If you travel by train a lot, then,
>> purely as matter of random chance, something nasty is probably going to
>> happen to you at least once while you're on the train.
>
>When I was a kid, it was well known that the kids who walked or cycled
>to school were trouble-causers. Every single incident of supposedly
>unprovoked violence at the school gates involved a kid who walked or
>cycled, and never someone who had been picked up by their mum and driven
>home.

School and picked up... and driven home? Blimey, I didn't fink we had
any one aged fewer than 60 years observing this group!

On 01.02.2024 00:15, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 30/01/2024 13:22, Recliner wrote:
>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/01/30/london-bridge-pride-column-trains-virtue-signalling/
>>
>> Suzanne Moore column:
>>
>> London Bridge is quite a confusing station. So many exits and so many
>> entrances. There is a massive number of platforms and sometimes services
>> suddenly move from one platform to another, so you have to dash right
>> across the station. Sometimes you look in vain for staff to help you, and
>> sometimes when you find them, they say things like, “Your guess is as
>> good
>> as mine, love.”
>>
>> Call me a basic b**** but what I require of Network Rail is trains
>> running
>> on schedule, clear signposting, assistance for those who need it, and to
>> feel safe on trains and at stations.
>>
>> At the moment none of this is happening. British Transport Police
>> estimate
>> that more than a third of female customers have been sexually harassed or
>> actually had offences committed against them on the Tube or train. In
>> short, women do not feel safe. For this, we need more staff visible and
>> present.
>>
>> Network Rail were also fined £6.7 million for a crash in 2020 because of
>> myriad safety failings.
>>
>> When I say safe, I mean I don’t want to be attacked, mugged or harassed.
>> But it has never occurred to me that Network Rail is there to affirm my
>> vague sense of sexual identity or to applaud either the number of mine or
>> anyone else’s sexual partners, their relationship status, or their
>> complete
>> lack of interest in the whole shebang. That is frankly weird. And
>> intrusive.
>>
>> So to see a picture of five white blokes – I am calling them blokes but
>> they may well self-ID as non-blokes, but I have as much faith in that
>> as I
>> do in a bus replacement service – standing by a weird concrete column
>> plastered in flags described as their “Pride Pillar” is bizarre.
>>
>> What is a Pride Pillar and how have we managed so long without one? It
>> is a
>> bit of fat concrete, covered with a collection of the new-fangled flags
>> that even the most dedicated purveyor of micro-identity politics would be
>> hard-pressed to recognise.
>>
>> There is the ever-present rainbow flag. Cool, most of us have the hang of
>> that. Then there is the Intersex Progress Pride Flag with triangles and
>> circles, and a whole bunch of others. There are flags representing
>> trans-allyship, the flag of polyamory, its yellow Pi sign indicating the
>> infinite possibilities of having an infinite number of sexual partners.
>> There is a gender fluid flag. There is a flag for people who don’t have
>> romantic feelings and a flag for people who only want to have sex with
>> those that they do have romantic feelings for, demisexuals in the new
>> parlance.
>> Never mind the aesthetics of this - and I do actually always think, “Pink
>> and blue for the trans flag? Really? Please let us be a little less
>> stereotypical, a little more imaginative” - but what are the actual
>> ethics
>> of spending money on this?
>>
>> Do rail passengers now feel London Bridge station understands their
>> sexual
>> confusion even though their train has just been cancelled? Will some feel
>> left out? Where is the two-spirit flag? Where is the representation for
>> sapiosexuals, those who only feel attracted to someone because of their
>> intelligence? Have they tended to the poor, overlooked asexuals who never
>> fancy anyone, or is that one hidden round the back?
>>
>> All of this faff is apparently to symbolise, according the station
>> manager
>> Cem Davies, that the station is an inclusive place to be in and work in.
>> Rightio! It turns out one of the blokes most proud of the Pride Pillar,
>> Shane Andrews MBE, has an unfortunate history of tweeting utterly vile
>> remarks about women. None of this comes as any great surprise to those of
>> us who have watched the dullard embrace of this kind of activism.
>>
>
> Surely NR should be spending its scarce funds on more useful things than
> so-called artwork?

That assumes NR actually spent money on this. More likely, they allowed
some 3rd party to come and install art in their station, with the costs
covered by the 3rd party.

Robin

In message <g8WcneCRXq7SJif4nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
21:27:44 on Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
remarked:
>On 30/01/2024 20:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <upavog$10u61$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:08 on Tue, 30 Jan
>>2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:45:08 +0000
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>> Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>> customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>> committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>>>
>>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>> material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>>> marketing professional for that.
>>>
>>> So marketing people are experts in statistics are they? Do us a favour.

>> Yes, some of them are, not all of them. It's a three year degree
>>course, after all.
>
>Isn't journalism a three year degree plus post grad in journalism?

In the USA their degrees are put together from modules, and result in
'major' and 'minor' qualifications. They've rebranded it slightly but
this is where my wife studied (Norman is just outside Oklahoma City):

https://www.ou.edu/gaylord ; the university itself is always known as
"O-U" by its alumni. She spent most of her life working in marcomms,
which is short for marketing communications, so having done a module in
marketing was a natural part of her education.

Back then, one of the biggest departmental tasks was 'advertising' where
it was important to understand where and when, to pay how much, to get
your product in front of potential customers. And that's almost entirely
statistics. That's why you get adverts for stairlifts on daytime TV
channels that's likely to be seen by people with the most potential need
for one.

After University she went to work for an advertising agency in Dallas,
one of whose clients was American Airlines [and obliquely her wake is
being organised for me by the former proprietor of Gatwick Airport's
advertising agency].

When poached by Amstrad US (whose office literally overlooked the
runways at DFW airport) to be their marketing manager at the tender age
of 24, one of her first projects was to place adverts for the <https://e
n.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_PPC_512> transportable computer in AA's in-
flight magazine; a world first, apparently.

It was a rather mis-understood machine (by geeks anyway), because it
was intended for travelling professionals to "lug", and then borrow
a conventional monitor when they got to their client's site. The LCD
screen and battery power was just so it was possible to run config
software, not the apps themselves. Neither did the screen have to be
particularly robust, because it spent most of its time folded down onto
the system unit.

From time to time I used to lug the prototype around (and log into email
and online services when I got to my destination). If you are on a tube-
train [change at Stratford onto the Central Line] the relatively small
footprint of it standing on end was invaluable when passengers were
packed like sardines into a vestibule.
--
Roland Perry

In message <upbs26$15oag$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:09:10 on Tue, 30 Jan
2024, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 30/01/2024 20:39, Roland Perry wrote:

>>> People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>>>sexual offences against them.

>> Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be
>>easy.
>
>It seems obvious that someone wanting to commit an assault on public
>transport is likely to pick a random stranger so less chance of being
>identified.

You might assume that, but you'd be wrong. Never heard of date-rape I
suppose?
--
Roland Perry

In message <ih8kri5s4tp1rr30fpndspfdafds8bd5d5@4ax.com>, at 10:41:07 on
Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 20:39:49 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <upb81o$128gb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:27:35 on Tue, 30 Jan
>>2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>On 30/01/2024 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <dK6uN.37647$7uxe.14481@fx09.ams1>, at 13:22:17 on Tue, 30
>>>>Jan 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> British Transport Police estimate that more than a third of female
>>>>>customers have been sexually harassed or actually had offences
>>>>>committed against them on the Tube or train.
>>
>>>> This is the same broken record that's been played about top-shelf
>>>>material on the Internet the last 25yrs. Most journalists don't
>>>> know the difference between reach and frequency - you need a
>>>> marketing professional for that.
>>
>>>> My wife had a degree in Marketing from the School of Journalism,
>>>> so was easily able to explain this to me.
>>>> ps The most likely person to harass or sexually offend are known
>>>>    to the victim, and aren't the mythical axe-murdering strangers.
>>>
>>>People using public transport are unlikely to know those committing
>>>sexual offences against them.
>>
>>Cite required. Bu as an expert(??) in statistics that should be easy.
>
>I know Coffee's right and so do you. I don't have a degree in
>statistics but it's bloody obvious. Of course the vast majority of
>this type of offence is (objectively) low level, unreported, and
>perpetrated by strangers. I don't see why you'd think of questioning
>it unless for the sake of an argument.

Because it's nonsense. But I'll refrain from arguing with anyone here,
because we haven't got time to bring you sufficiently up to speed.
--
Roland Perry