Are ther Tories pandering to the Liberals?

[anotheoldgit]

http://tinyurl.com/2w3h4yf

So they are to ban jobs of a sexual nature from being advertised in Job Centres?

The reason:

/// Mr Grayling said the ban aimed to protect job-seekers from feeling they have to consider work they weren’t comfortable with.///

Does Mr Grayling think that the ordinary person cannot reason for themselves whether they would feel comfortable applying for such jobs?

Are photographic glamour model, and nude artistic model jobs to be banned also?

[Zeuhl]

You seem a tad confused in your thinking ...

///nude artistic model jobs ///

are by definition jobs of an artistic nature not ///jobs of a sexual nature///

whereas the jobs they propose to ban (and //glamour model// are.
.

[youngmafbog]

Sorry Zeuhl, dont buy that one. One mans art is another mans porn. You ban it all or none at all.

To answer AOG, yep loooks like the liberals.

You wold think we had something better to sort out. Some people are really petty.

They have usually fallen out the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down to which fuels their jealousy.

Politics of envy a true liberal labour stance !

[Kromovaracun]

How is this a liberal measure? It seems far more socially conservative than liberal.

Plus if you read the article it was the nasty liberal loony labour government who allowed them to be advertised in the first place.

[Gromit]

The Government should not encourage anyone to work in the sex industry. If a person wants to take that career choice, that is there choice.

[anotheoldgit]

Kromovaracun

/// Plus if you read the article it was the nasty liberal loony labour government who allowed them to be advertised in the first place.///

Correction, it was the 'nasty liberal loony labour government' who was forced by the High Court to lift the ban.

/// Such a ban had previously been in place at the taxpayer-funded employment exchanges but that changed seven years ago when Ann Summers, a sex toys and suggestive lingerie retailer, successfully argued at the High Court that it was unlawful.///

[anotheoldgit]

/// The Government should not encourage anyone to work in the sex industry.///

I think the last Government did their very best to encourage them.

Have we not seen a massive increase in sex industry employment, since the late Labour Government opened the flood gates to Eastern European immigrants?

[Oneeyedvic]

/// Does Mr Grayling think that the ordinary person cannot reason for themselves whether they would feel comfortable applying for such jobs? ///


If you are applying for Job Seekers Allowance, you must apply for jobs which you are eligible for. In the first 13 weeks, you can apply specifically for jobs you 'want' or are qualified for. After 13 weeks, you have to apply for anything that goes.

This means that my wife would (if unemployed) have to apply for a job as a pole dancer, and if she decided not to, could be terminated of her benefits.

Do you think that is fair?

[jno]

Vic, if your wife refused to take a pole-dancing job she would undoubtedly be one of those workshy layabouts we hear about on AB, whose benefits should be withdrawn at once.

[Zeuhl]

///Sorry Zeuhl, dont buy that one. One mans art is another mans porn. You ban it all or none at all. ///

So, you see no difference between artistic representations of our human form and the sexual posturing of a lap-dancer.

You must find museums, art galleries and anatomical drawings very arousing!

.

[Zeuhl]

///You ban it all or none at all. ///

In that case, if they are all the same, and i assume you are not suggesting banning art that includes representations of the nude body that means you don't believe in any controls on porn.
.

[Kromovaracun]

"Correction, it was the 'nasty liberal loony labour government' who was forced by the High Court to lift the ban. "

Whatever - my point still stands.