What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Note in Post #3372**

what polices would they be?

the electorate actually doesnt have faith in the opposition, so wont elect them, and theres currently enough voters that are actually relatively happy with the current situation

most major parties actually believe the private sector is the complete solution to our housing issues, but more so our current government parties, as this is a fundamental part of their overall political and economic ideologies, its untrue, although the private sector is required to help get the job done, the state actually needs to be the leader for the whole process. we may never elect a government which holds this reality at its center core of beliefs, we probably also need to create a state construction company, and other critical state functions in order to do so, such as a state owned construction bank etc, a development bank etc, probably wont ever happen though, so on we go!

the current model is primarily based in continual price inflation, this is what financialisation does, parties such as ffg will never accept this reality, thinking and believing, it ll eventually work, it wont, ever!

Let's say your conspiracy theory is true, why exactly does it matter? Honestly sounds like a pretty weird thing to care about at all.

The EU should not expand any further. As Hungary have shown these Eastern countries don't align with us. Having the likes of Ukraine, Bosnia, Albania or Georgia in the EU would be a disaster

With the womans Euros over and with the WNBA the whole thing about getting equal pay etc is doing the rounds again.

Do they actually really believe what they're saying? Or are media outlets just misquoting them? If it's not why then is it not being called out.

The fact is womans sports will never ever be at the same level as mens and that's a fact. However most are pretty much different sports and if marketed as such itmight actually go somewhere instead of trying to make it something it's not.

I'm happy with them promoting it and making a fuss about it. The fuss around the 6 Nations shows that you can get crowds to watch a sport if there's a big event around it and all the fanfare that goes with it. My mother will have the 6N on tv in the background and she has no real interest in the sport. If you promote it and get it into the culture, then people will watch it who otherwise have little interest.

If its being discussed around you and everyone has an opinion, then people will keep an eye on it. I don't think many people will watch a sport out of obligation to support it though. It needs the fanfare around it. So I've no issue with them promoting it.

Which is a massive indictment of the supposed fans of the game who either won't go to games unless tickets are massively discounted or won't watch matches in great enough numbers on TV.

Women's sports gets plenty of promotion now so that excuse cannot be made anymore.

Well of course they set viewing records for ITV and BBC , England were doing well so they're bound to get big numbers.But it's miles behind the mens equivalent viewing figures.

Stadiums almost all sold out because it was in Switzerland and all the stadiums are 35k or less capacity.If the men were playing in the tournament in Switzerland they could have charge probably 5-10 times or more for each ticket and sold out every match.

Of course making money is a factor particularly if the players are arguing they should be paid more.A loss on the mens equivalent tournament would be a gigantic disaster for UEFA but it's tolerated for the womens game.

If women went to games and watched games in the same numbers as men do then the figures for both attendance and TV all across europe would match what the men get but of course that isn't the case.

The only time the Camogie or Ladies football get a decent attendance is when free tickets are handed out to be distributed to youngsters.

It's a growing game all indicators attendance and viewing figures would back this up.

The decision to choose stadiums with roughly 30k was vindicated as they were all, bar 2, a sell out and created a far better atmosphere than having an 80k stadium half full like the Club World Cup had for many of the matches.

Not sure why you're that bothered by women's sport when you clearly have no interest in it. Just ignore it, very easy thing to do, but no you seem to get very aggravated by it.

They wouldn't, media rights make up the bulk of the revenue but ticket sale are just one example of the difference between the type of support mens and womens sport get.

16 million watched the England women yesterday on UK TV whereas 24 million watched the england men in the euro final in 2024.

Global audience for yesterdays women's euro's final was projected at 45 million, whereas for last years mens euros final they projected a global audience of 400 million.

So basically people will only watch womens sport if they have a team to support whereas mens sport gets a lot more viewership from neutrals and seeing as neutrals make up the bulk of any potential audience this is where women's sport loses out.

Womens football was banned in England until 1971 and many clubs only became professional in the past 20 years. Comparing it to the men’s game is disingenuous, they are not like for like.

Best to compare it to the attendances and viewing figures over the last number of Women’s Euros and you’ll see the continued growth tournament on tournament. It’s a rapidly growing sport and doesn’t seem like it’s slowing in its growth at all.

If you had told people 12 years ago that 16 million people in England would watch a women’s football match they’d have laughed at you. The fact that it isn’t even a surprise anymore is a testament to it’s growing popularity.

The concept of a revenge fantasy because of abusive spouses isn't a particularly new concept. Pretty sure EastEnders did it a few decades back. Half the point was the women were pretty much destroyed by the partner. I'm not seeing an issue with depicting it.

It seems every police officer that gets killed is a hero. It really cheapens the term.

Not much has emerged about the shooter story from NYC where an officer who was working security for the building was killed.

He is immediately branded a hero. Now maybe he did something amazing that I haven't read about, but I think the media are going to label him a hero regardless.

My question is what did he actually do?