RayM wrote: » This kind of crap is hilarious. As long as the "regular, normal guy" isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then why on earth should he worry about chatting to a woman (as opposed to "chatting up a girl", which sounds like something a teenager would do)?
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » The worrying thing is the regular, normal guy will actually worry about chatting up a girl.
BillyBobBS wrote: » It's getting to the stage where you'd be afraid to chat up a woman or compliment them. #allmenarentsexualpredators
Utopia Parkway wrote: » Always bizarre on this show how they come back from an ad break for 30 seconds and then end the show straight into another ad break.
alan partridge aha wrote: » Lbn Really like Maria very sharp lady.
horseburger wrote: » Indeed, I thought more time should have been given to exploring the issues and letting the school representatives, of the schools with a religious ethos, in the audience, speak without interruption, when they were about to detail, the issue of their schools enrolment processes, in cases where there are limited spaces. Someone put it up on youtube at the time, which is handy, as it is no longer on the RTE Player.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO5vsJv5Xgs Here is a bio of Maria Steen:https://www.catholicireland.net/event/evangelium-conference-young-catholics-18-25-maynooth/ It includes the following detail: "Maria Steen is married with four children. Formerly an architect and barrister. Maria is also a speaker for the Iona Institute. She has appeared on National Television and Radio media on numerous occasions discussing topics such as Surrogacy, Children’s Rights, religion in society, Marriage and Family and issues". Here is an item on The Iona Institute website about the Journal fact check which originally suggested that she was incorrect, in what she stated on The Claire Byrne show, but later re-assessed the details, and found she was accurate in what she said. It includes the statement that she sent to The Journal, about the earlier conclusion it made in its fact check item, regarding the statements she made on the Claire Byrne Show.http://www.ionainstitute.ie/journal-ie-takes-aim-at-maria-steen-and-misses/
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » I remember that episode-it was bizarre, to say the least. The speakers were very haphazardly selected. One side, was an actress and parent. The other was a doctor, Maria Steen, and parent. The doctor was prepared, the actress wasn't When it cut to the people in the audience-one had given a quote that he claimed to not have made, yet if you googled it-it's exactly what he said. Him trying to row back on it made him look a lot worse. Especially since Maria Steen could cite it. It felt very unprepared by one side of the discussion, like the actress was speaking from experience, but that's one person's experience, it's not a group. It's not a statistic. On the other hand, the doctor had statistics, she knew what she was talking about, she knew the studies. That's the biggest problem I have with CB Live-you get a clear disparity between the sides of discussion-like they have no idea of what they're talking about. I may have disagreed, at times, with Maria Steen, but she made her point so well that I was like 'okay, she won the debate'. Seems like Claire Byrne was trying to prevent those who were on opposite sides to Steen from looking foolish.
horseburger wrote: » I'd prefer if there was more time given to each item, rather than having four or five items discussed on the show and only giving around 10 minutes, often less, per item. Often, because there is less time given to each item discussed, people in the audience who have been invited on, because they have a particular interest in an item for discussion, don't get time to make their observations and they get cut off by the presenter before they have finished making their point. For example, earlier this year, on the issue of enrolment of students in schools with a religious ethos, and schools with no religious ethos, the school principal from a Catholic school and Susie Hall from the Church of Ireland schools Board of Education, who were in the audience, did not get a chance to fully make their points detailing their enrolment policies, in circumstances where there are not enough places available, to accommodate all the applications. In this particular episode, the speakers in the audience, from both Catholic and Church of Ireland schools, did not get a chance to fully detail their perspectives on the topic, on the issue of enrolment policies and schools being over subscribed. Both were making the point that the issue was that successive governments were not making available the resources to build more schools, with no religious ethos, to accommodate parents who didn't want their children attending schools with a religious ethos. They were interrupted by Claire Byrne, before they had a chance to fully detail how they accept applications for places, in cases where there are more applications than places. The issue of how schools with no religious ethos prioritize applications, where there is more applications than places, was not discussed. As an example, a parent in the audience mentioned that her child was enrolled on a waiting list for a place in an Educate Together school, when her child was a few weeks old, and had not been accepted. She said "we never got a place just because our name never got to the top of the list". She didn't get to finish what she had intended to say fully, either, because time was running out on the show. The priorities of selection, of applications to Educate Together schools, was not detailed, in situations where there are less places than applications. I mean, say three neighbouring families apply at the same time. and there aren't enough spaces to accommodate each application, how does an Educate Together school decide which family is accepted. For example, if two of the families applications are accepted because they have older brothers or sisters in the school, the third family who might not have other children in the school, will be disappointed, for the child, not getting a place in the school. This third family might also feel excluded, simply because the child they hoped would attend that school, might be their first child to attend school, and through no fault of their own, they don't have older children, already in attendance at that school. My guess is that any type of prioritization of acceptance of applications, will leave families disappointed, in cases where places are limited, no matter if it's a school with a religious ethos, or one that does not have a religious ethos. The priorities of enrolment of Educate Together schools, in situations where there are more applications made, than places available, wasn't discussed, even though Paul Rowe of Educate Together, was in the audience. He said there were far more applications made to Educate Together schools than places available, but he didn't detail how they prioritize applications where there are less places available than applications made. It would have been interesting to hear details on this. If it is done with regard to how near a family lives from a school, there's still going to be a difficulty deciding who is accepted, if for example, neighbouring families have made applications for their children to attend a school, and there aren't enough places for each family's child. If, on the show, they had, maybe one, or at most, two items per show, I think they could have a more detailed discussion. And forget about the polls, as the questions are usually framed in such a way that don't consider other aspects of the issue related, to the question being asked.
CatFromHue wrote: » @ Horseburger that's one of the reasons I don't watch the show anymore. People who did have good points to make were interrupted, by Claire tying to take them on a different tangent which made no sense, or cut off early.
FrancieBrady wrote: » https://debuk.wordpress.com/2015/05/16/call-me-woman/
AnneFrank wrote: » yes i really don't get that at all, i mean calling a lady is respectful no ? Can any ladies/girls/women explain this i'm confused !
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/892f365931e5cb4ba5c9d4ce2c7da299.svg)
