Iirc this snow clearing practice has also been referenced in Caroline Perez’ book ‘Invisible Women’ that deals with exposing the data bias in a world designed for men. Really interesting read.

Yeah, that grit gets into places!

[deleted]

/u/Sawfish1212 said (and deleted):

>Glad there was nothing important going on in the area, like crime or education issues.... >Instead a row over who gets their roads cleared first, the people paying the high taxes so they can commute to work, or the people who don't pay taxes because they walk or ride a bike.... with snow removal and road treatment paid for by taxes...

I'm a software developer (hence, a pretty high amount of taxes) who rides his bike to work. Other colleagues walk. Now, based on your assumptions and the fact that the article takes place in Europe, I'm going to assume you must be american.

I work for a company that does data analysis and one of our clients has us finding bias by demographics, primarily race, primarily African American. I went in to this project with an open mind, expecting to find some correlative data to suggest self-organizing populations of similar demographics trend towards their own bias, and that is the case, but that makes it very convenient for malicious humans to use seemingly innocuous algorithms to deny entire populations.

So when a large religious fried chicken joint has used metrics like location to major thoroughfares, propensity to eat out, gun ownership, church donations etc… we find that if we overlay that on a map of high-income mostly White neighborhoods… well look at that. Did they say, “we won’t build in Black and Brown neighborhoods” ? No, but they didn’t need to.

Unless you are representative of the majority of your area, that doesn't change how taxes should be spent.

Or how ridiculous it is to add a sexism charge to allocation of funds, unless women are still kept from driving cars or holding office jobs in your area...

Where do you get the idea that people who walk or cycle don't pay taxes?

Never said that, however fuel and vehicle taxes fund road maintenance... so they should get the priority of what they pay for...

Did you... read the article?

>The study found 79 per cent of pedestrian injuries occurred in winter, and 69 per cent of those affected were women. Clearing paths first halved accidents and saved the local government money, reported FSG.

And yes, we're pretty big on NOT using cars over here.

Vehicle and fuel taxes go into the general pot and are spent just like most other taxes. They do not directly pay for road maintenance.

Yeah there's weird stuff like that. Kinda like how women's "room" temp is a few degrees higher than that of guys, so when men determine the climate control, women generally feel colder.

Sounds like stupid, but entirely typical, government greed and waste

Sounds like it goes into a pot and gets divied up as needed. That's how other taxes work.

It's the well-known statistical problem. Race and gender is highly correlated with a lot of other factors, so if you optimize for any of those factors for whatever reasons, you get a bias in race/gender. And next you're called out to be racist or sexist.

Is "gritting" the same as "salting", or are they actually putting down dirt? Or something else entirely?

The same

You go where the market is.

Thank you. I came to ask. Us poor ignorant yanks.

But fried chicken restaurants aren’t a public service. If they’ve determined profitability by location based on prior data, you can’t fault them for their decision. That is, they’re a symptom of a larger problem and can’t be expected to be a vanguard of equality.

>if you optimize for any of those factors
>
>...
>
>And next you're called out to be racist or sexist

r/woosh

And look at what the major shortages were (in the US anyway) during the pandemic. It was all stuff primarily used by women: toilet paper, baby formula, tampons. And it's because men in charge made the decisions about where those resources should be allocated and it wasn't to "women's" products. I STILL cannot find my preferred tampons - can't even order them online, they'll deliver the wrong kind.

It’s ridiculous, isn’t it. We’re a mere afterthought, if at all.

Perez’ book is a really good read, but also so extremely frustrating because it kept reminding me how women and our experiences are just not valued, or overlooked, or or or. Infuriating.

Canadian senator Murray Sinclair, who chaired Canada's Truth and Reconcilliation commission put it pretty well:

"If you get rid of all of the racists in all of the positions of government, policing, justice, health — you will still have a problem. Because you will have a system that is functioning based upon policies, priorities and decisions that direct how things are to be done, that come from a time when racism was very blatant."

When people talk (knowledgeably) about systemic racism or systemic sexism, this is what they mean. They aren't automatically accusing people who are part of these systems of being racist, they're calling on people who have agency within that system to learn more, uncover their blind spots, and make changes.

I will concede, however that there are people who equate systemic discrimination with personal bigotry. Some of them just don't get the nuance, some of them are frustrated that people in power are remaing "blind" to these problems for so long, and start to think that maybe there's something else to it.

[deleted]

This is the most exhausting discussion in the world and it keeps. happening.

What was useful for me to understand is that 21st-century racists treat racism like some kind of taint that pollutes everything it touches. Of course, instead of thinking of it as acting via miasma or some other gobbledegook, this reasoning uses egregious abuse of statistics to achieve a pseudo-scientific foundation instead. The general gist is that anything that can be found to have a slight correlation with race must necessarily be racist.

The problem with the idea "you go where the market is" is that it doesn't inject a racist lens onto everything. It proposes a kind of decision-making that isn't fundamentally rooted in a racist worldview, and therefore is impossible for our dear 21st-century racists to grasp.

Working in an office that requires full suits and ties in the summer... it's kinda ridiculous for someone to turn the thermostat up while refusing to wear something other than a dress with spaghetti straps (yes this has happened more than once)

So his reason for why the existing gritting routes are sexist, is that more men than women drive to work? Fire that guy immediately

I'm not sure that the correlation is with gender. It tends to be with sex. Best not to conflate them these days.

You figure out an overlap of demos that AREN'T race/gender/sexuality directly, but which, when combined, effectively equate to a particular race/gender/sexuality and then just say you're focused on the former, not the latter.

Tale as old as time.

Indeed. There is certainly temperature sexism and it generally favors women.

Yes only women use toilet paper.

🥹

Tbf if a fried chicken joint owned by white people decided to open primarily in black neighborhoods that would probably be construed as racist as well

Rock salt, it's a mix of salt and grit. Scattered across the road from the back of a specialised lorry.

So Chick-fil-A doesn't build in poor neighborhoods? I wonder why!?? The funny part is "black and brown people" don't wanna live in these places either, as soon as they get a little money they move. Is it really on fast food restaurants to fix poverty? They put restaurants where they expect to make the most money, with minimal risk. Somehow I doubt you'd hold an Amazon warehouse or Google data center to the same absurd standard as a company you disagree with religiously or politically.

Tbf if you're going into a black neighborhood to eat fried chicken, why would you go to the white owned place?

TP was well explained by the fact that commerical TP found in workplaces is different from that sold to consumers for their home. Commerical products are recycled and bigger rolls. As people stayed home more, they used more of the latter than the former, hence the shortage. Men don't make decisions about where resources are allocated, the market demand shifted, and covid reduced supply by interfering with production and distribution.

>So when a large religious fried chicken joint

Tell us you're talking about Chick-Fil-A without telling us you're talking about Chick-Fil-A.

>And next you're called out to be racist or sexist.

And since it's a well-known statistical problem, that might not be wrong.

This and the Tiger Woods posts have certainly brought out an Energy in this sub

Despite the headline, The rundown is car paths are cleared before walkways. The fair way to do this would be to determine the most benefit. Now this can then be defined by multiple categories. Are we aiming for public safety or economics? Or should we do it based on amount of people that pass over the given route per hour? Or when it comes to safety, do we look at how severe the injuries are or perhaps deaths ? Or maybe we just say what is the best way to get it all done as efficiently as possible?

No matter what, I don't think there is a fair way to do it. Suggestions?

Are you arguing that black communities arent in the market for fried chicken blessed by god?

Toilet paper and baby formula are primarily used by women?

No. I’m arguing there may be a competitor who already has that market

Well said. I have a hard time understanding the motivation behind this approach for a business of any kind, let alone a fast food chicken chain.

Part of the reason why the discussion keeps happening is because more and more people are being brought into it. Fresh ears need to hear it, even if the voices are tired.

It's important to know when and how to take breaks from the work so that it doesn't burn you out, and so that you can step back and strategize about where you're going to put your time and energy.

I'd go to the one that sells the Louisiana style, because it tastes better.

Me too. Even halfway through reading the article, I was still going "huh?".

I'm here to find out what a gritting route is. Or perhaps it is a verb?

Wth is gritting is this title gore or regional slang ?

To be faaaaair

I’d wager men use considerably more toilet paper than women. And the “shortage” was caused by idiots panic buying, not manufacturing.

Are you claiming only women feed babies?! That incredibly stupid. The shortage there was caused by a couple of things, all government related. People receiving WIC are only allowed to purchase certain brands of formula, the government happened to shut down that manufacturer over some bullshit rumors as was too stupid to get them going again in a timely manner.

Never heard about women’s hygiene product shortages. The23 women in my house never had a problem finding any. Maybe if lunatics weren’t pushing to have men’s restrooms stocked with them there wouldn’t be a shortage?

Its basically salting the roads in the winter, but its rock salt mixed with little rocks.

Fight the dress code instead, man. It's stupid that you have to wear suit and tie anywhere, but especially to freakin' work in summertime. If women can wear temperature appropriate clothes, so can men. Shorts it is.

[deleted]

Then the problem is requiring men to wear full suits and ties in summer.

If they opened up a place called “Mudflap’s Oversized Lip-Smackin’ Chicken” and only brought it to black neighborhoods, yes that would be extremely racist. If Chik-Fil-A opened up locations in black neighborhoods and white neighborhoods without significant bias I’m sure no one would care really.

Now run these analytics focusing on crime, homicide, illegal gun usage, illegal drug usage. Please share the results. We need to build up communities before we tell people to invest in places where the analytics tell us it’s a bad investment.

Idk it's really only been a few decades.

Then you still go with the cooler temperature. Its inefficient to go with the hotter temperature when those that prefer warmer can add a layer.

I don't disagree. But until that changes, consider this scenario:

If the office was all women, and half were going through menopause and suffering hot flashes, it would still be fairest to keep the temp slightly lower and ask those who weren't suffering hot flashes to bring a cardigan.

I agree with you, but my work involves lawyers and government so that's not going to happen.

But I said to someone else, if the office was all women and half were suffering hot flashes, they shouldn't have to suffer because someone refused to wear a cardigan.

Aussie here, came to the comments to make sense of it, but had to look up both those terms.

Yeah this is exactly right. I think if you look at the chicken place and decide it’s racist for using things like propensity to eat out and location to large thoroughfares, like the other guy was saying. But then conclude the chicken place is racist, it’s like you weren’t willing to accept any other answer.

These issues are correlated but pointing the finger of causation at the chicken place itself doesn’t make sense and doesn’t lead to any kind of useful solution.

Is relevant, because it’s what they seem to be doing in this article with sexism. Apparently only men are working these specific jobs? That’s not about the trains being built in the wrong location.

Uh yes.

>determined profitability by location

I also heard Chick-fil-A is a lot more controlling in terms of spacing out franchises to avoid overlap and prohibiting ownership groups from owning multiple locations. So determining locations that maximize profitability is a good thing for their franchisees.

Most men don’t use toilet paper when they piss, only when they poo. Women use it more because we use it for when we pee, when we poo, when we have an unexpected “was that my period or just my body doing body things down there” moments (aka vaginal discharge), and when we actually have our period (because it’s easier to put a tampon in if you clear away the flood of blood first).

And realistically women still do the majority of basic childcare things like feeding the baby (even when they’re on formula and not breast milk). That’s not to say men don’t do it, just that women do it more - and it’s not necessarily because men aren’t pulling their weight for parenting duties, but sometimes for reasons like some places not having paternity leave alongside maternity leave, etc.

So yeah, I think it’s safe to say women use toilet paper (and arguably most toiletries) and baby formula more than men.

Sounds like a personal anecdote to me.

Obviously men use toilet paper, but it’s common sense to realise that women use it more. Men use it when they poo. Women use it when they pee, when they poo, when they have vaginal discharge, and when they have their period (because it’s easier to put a tampon in after you’ve cleaned up down there and mopped up the flood of blood). According to studies, women also use the bathroom more frequently than men.

So yes, I think it’s safe to say women use toilet paper more than men.

It’s insanity. Now, due to their intentionally absurd language and framing, anyone who opposes their plan is a sexist and misogynist. 🙄🙄🙄

>When people talk (knowledgeably) about systemic racism or systemic sexism, this is what they mean. They aren't automatically accusing people who are part of these systems of being racist, they're calling on people who have agency within that system to learn more, uncover their blind spots, and make changes.

Except this almost never happens and it is instead used as a cudgel that you are not allowed to defend yourself against lest ye be labelled racist.

>happening.

Idk about this word. We never actually have the discussion, and I can tell, because the word “reparations” is still a bogeyman.

No, I think this discussion keeps getting hinted at, and you’re tired of the hints. Because if we actually ever had the conversation, you’d have much more immediately relevant things to complain about.

Sounds like common sense to me, considering women use the bathroom more frequently than men and use toilet paper for more things than men - but here’s a source I found after a quick Google that says the same thing.

As for the “women use baby formula more than men” - maternity leave is often longer than paternity leave (if it even exists). So women are by that very fact more likely to be feeding the baby, simply because they spend more time with the baby during that maternity leave. According to the International Labour Organisation, 98 countries meet the ILO standard of at least 14 weeks maternity leave and 107 countries finance maternity leave cash benefits through social security. Compared with paternity leave, which is found in 78 countries, and only five of those countries provide paternity leave for more than two weeks. So of the percentage of babies who receive formula milk alongside or instead of breast milk, there’s a fairly good chance that - at least in a heteronormative household with a father and a mother - the mother is doing more feeding and so using formula more than the father.

Salting roads, like for snow.

I find zero problem with a private company using data like that to determine where to open a location. It’s not racist to want to open a store where you are most likely to make profit. That’s just good business. I never understood people wanting corporations to be as you said the vanguard of equality. It’s strange that we will complain about corporations having too much power but then expect them to be the champions of our society.

Isn’t everything though? I mean we can’t breathe for sexist oxygen molecules jumping down our throats…

Well put on a coat then. Pretty hard for dudes to walk around nude.

The guy the founded Popeye's Chicken is white.

[deleted]

This response focuses on who the gritting routes benefit without specifically acknowledging who the routes neglect and how.

I’m sure you comprehended more than that after reading the entire article. They even elaborated and included injury statistics to support their claims.

BTW sexism, etc. is not necessarily an intention or a feeling. Nobody (in this context) is trying to say anyone went out of their way to intentionally create a disadvantage for women. The argument is that this important decision regarding gritting routes was made during a time when working men’s needs were prioritized over anyone else’s and it needs updating (which some may see as implying someone made intentional decisions to disadvantage women but that would be them erroneously conflating creating benefits for men with creating disadvantages for women — it’s possible to benefit both).

(To reiterate) the article also provided common examples and peer-reviewed data for the requested considerations.

Depends on where you are. In California, no salt, only dirt and sand.

Could also be Pizza Ranch.

What are "social caring responsibilities" as it is framed as something that is not using the same routes the those going to work? Are they talking about types of employment that do not use the same routes as regular workers? I found the article confusing.

Does gun ownership and church donations correlate to liking chicken? Weird data to use.

Covid denier suggests bring back redlining, nobody surprised.

Why? Honestly, what's the problem with that analysis?

Explain to me the point of your hypothesis? Is your intention to fine them for not building there? Make them build it there?

Who the fuck is downvoting Letterkenny? You got a problem with Letterkenny you have a problem with me and I suggest you let that marinate.

They're the kind of work that housewives do - going to other homes to help out their families, grocery shopping, other shopping, dropping off and picking up children from school, social activities, doctors appointments.

you should probably get off the internet and talk to real people for a bit.

Its a dog whistle in corporate form... I'm not racist but none of my locations are near black people

[removed]

False. In San Diego and Inperial Counties I have seen them spray some sort of liquid deicer. May or may not be salt, but when it dries it certainly looks like salt.

It’s called systemic racism for a reason right? Get to do racist things and then say “oh no it’s not racist, it’s just that’s what the system says is best. We’re just trying to be efficient guys! Honest!”

Well, consider this. The dress code for men is a full suit. What falls into the dress code for women that's ever warmer than that? Women are expected to dress in ways that aren't as warm. The dress codes are what's ridiculous.

A cardigan still isn't nearly as warm as a full suit.

In our area they treat the main roads first and then move onto the major bus routes, everything else is left untreated and footpaths are never touched. I think that keeping main transport, and in particular public transport routes open makes sense.

Most deliveries are made by road, emergency vehicles travel on the road, busses travel on the road. As much as people may not like it, for the time being roads are essential infrastructure.

Whilst it may be a fact that more men drive than women the main reason for treating roads is to keep essential services operational. In many areas only major roads and key transport routes are treated with the estate roads being left untreated.

Good thing I wasn't talking about suits in that example because it was all women. You didn't even read the comment before responding.

Don't nobody want that white people fried chicken anyway.

Don’t working mothers and wives commute then?

Like KFC?

But that's the annoying thing, we've just invented the need to wear suits to be a worthy human. No suit, no skills. I'm really glad that my job doesn't require such nonsense. I get that you alone can't turn up to work with bermuda shorts and your favorite band t-shirt, but I wish you could.

That's the nicest thing someone has said this week haha

What he’s saying is some wives don’t like their husbands going up the gritter.

It should be noted those mains roads are also essential for emergency services, not focusing on them would prevent ambulances reaching anyone whose had an accident

Makes a £300k cut, Tries to hide it by giving a “reserve” (can’t keep equipment on a reserve), then distracts by claiming gritting is sexist

Statistically women are significantly worse effected by icy footpaths, but prioritising footpaths over major service roads is idiotic

Exactly, and because most deliveries are by road they also keep the shelves stocked.

Maybe it's short on a historical timeline, but I am so tired of the knee-jerk 'but I don't hate anybody' reaction

He basically says that more men (drive to) work than women, but calls others sexist.

[deleted]

And why could that be an argument for being sexist?

Do you not know that whole families, who used to go to work and school, were staying home during the pandemic? So rather than using toilet paper at work/school, households were required to have a greater supply. Do you understand that? It has very little to do with what type of genitals you're wiping.

And stop the sexist narrative that women use baby formula. What fucking year do you think this is?

Okay?? That doesn’t really change my point - which was that although obviously everyone uses toilet paper, women use it more. Because, again: men (and boys) don’t tend to use toilet paper for when they pee, just when they poo. Women (and girls) use it for peeing, pooing, vaginal discharge and periods - relevant because (IIRC) girls can get their period as early as around eight (though it’s usually between 12-15).

Also, considering women use the bathroom more frequently than men I still think it’s safe to say people with vaginas use more toilet paper than people with penises. Because, you know. That‘s just how math works.

> stop the sexist narrative that women use formula

I’m guessing you mean “that women use formula more than men”, but that’s not sexist - it’s just plain accurate. It’s not a judgment on how involved dads are - it’s just an acknowledgement of feeding habits as influenced by aspects of society (specifically maternity and paternity leave).

Maternity leave is often longer than paternity leave (if it even exists). So women are by that very fact more likely to be feeding the baby, simply because they spend more time with the baby during that maternity leave. According to the International Labour Organisation, 98 countries meet the ILO standard of at least 14 weeks maternity leave and 107 countries finance maternity leave cash benefits through social security. Compared with paternity leave, which is found in 78 countries, and only five of those countries provide paternity leave for more than two weeks. So of the percentage of babies who receive formula milk alongside or instead of breast milk, there’s a fairly good chance that - at least in a heteronormative household with a father and a mother - the mother is doing more feeding and so using formula more than the father.

I don’t like stereotyping, but that looks exactly like the kind of person who would say some shit like that.

>Okay?? That doesn’t really change my point

You don't have to change your point. Again: people used more toilet paper during the pandemic because they were home.

Women don't use baby formula.

See how my point didn't change either? You're really going to a lot of effort to argue about something so dumb. You can't just admit that people use toilet paper.

They prioritise routes used for commuting over smaller rural roads, which seems sensible, but actually isn’t.

This article explains it better than I can.

Someone should invent a kind of material you can place around your body to make you a little warmer. Until that distant day, I guess women have to remain forever cold in the office.

/s

wasn't this already tried? Like I'm sure one of the scandivian countries attempted a switch towards gritting routes towards schools and daycares (since it was typically women who were ferrying children about) from the old main thoroughfare and workplace focused routes.

iirc what happened was it worked great in a trial in a small city and when there was a second trial in a bigger city it was absolute havoc because nobody could get anywhere. The only reason it worked in the smaller city was because the routes for schools and primary thoroughfares were mostly the same whereas in the bigger city they weren't. In the end the idea got scrapped i think.

can't remember much about it and I can't find any sources so idk if this was even real but maybe someone else can chime in with some details on it

TL;DR: most accidents that result from snow actually occur on pavements and cycle paths (not necessarily "rural" roads), which are disproportionately used by women.

>And so the Swedish gender equality initiative team began to explore
whether snow clearing was sexist. Sure enough, they found the routine of
clearing snow typically benefited men over women.

What's that? The society-for-finding-things-that-are-sexist investigated whether a thing was sexist and found that the thing was sexist? Colour me shocked.

Something which they thought couldn’t possibly be sexist, and got data to back it up, which eventually saved the government lots of money.

What’s the issue here?

They seem butthurt that knowledge can be investigated and found through logical applications. They may not have much practice with it to understand.

We put down grit for traction on the ice in the US. Some areas don’t allow salt so it’s only grit.

You know, I realized that, they do it here. I just don't think I've heard it called that. We just say they salted the road even though you know it's not salt.

But it's a fact. More men do drive to work than women. Simply acknowledging reality isn't sexist, nor is it saying that women don't work at all. The routes from residential areas to business areas are well salted . But then the routes caretakers use to drive the children around to school and activities, visit family in other residential areas, and to do general tasks that aren't in business areas aren't as salted because their needs aren't being considered.

The salting route policy is favoring workers needs and not caretakers needs. And because those roles are statistically fulfilled by men and women respectively, the policy is sexist. It effects women negatively more often than men. Acknowledging a majority doesn't ignore that some women work and some men are stay-at-home caretakers.

Are you also mad at astronomers discovering something new about celestial bodies?

They could also wear like a pantsuit so

Was there a figure for the increase in road accidents due to lack of gritting?

I don’t think kfc is only in primarily black neighborhoods?

Ah okay. Missed that part. Still not sure that makes a difference here. It definitely has a lot of its locations in black neighborhoods.

>a large religious fried chicken joint has used metrics like location to major thoroughfares, propensity to eat out

Wow, clearly they're racist. What sort of food selling business would site themselves near lots of people who order food???

I don’t think there was a increase in road accidents. It’s not that the main roads weren’t gritted, it’s that the smaller paths were prioritised.

Just FYI, rock salt is not salt mixed with rocks. It's salt crystals mined directly out of the ground (rather than evaporated from seawater or runoff).

Rock salt is most often used without grit in it. It's cheaper when it isn't food-grade.

The argument isn't about whether or not to treat roads, it's about the fact that roads more heavily used by stay-at-home caretakers aren't being salted. Those aren't just private estate roads, they are the public roads between residential areas, the roads that don't necessarily all go through business centers. This issue stretches beyond just the "gritting routes" it's also a public transportation issue that travel between residential neighborhoods is a lot more difficult, expensive, and poorly executed to manage than travel to business centers.

>but prioritising footpaths over major service roads is idiotic

Why does it have to be one or the other? He's not saying "stop salting major roads" that's a false dichotomy.

Salt plus fine gravel for extra grip.

The suits are fine! Modern suits are super comfortable, even in summer.

Make the women wear suits!

In a culinary setting you'd be right, in a road salting setting it's slightly more complicated.

You can get very fine halites (rock salt as you say) mined as an alternative source to sea salt.

Council gritters (clues in the name) use rough mined rocksalt which is mixed with sand and other aggregates and usualy screened to ~ 10 mm to make it amenable to spreading this definitely does contain small stones and grit and is why you get gritty sandy buildup on roads during gritting season that won't wash directly away when it rains (as a motorcyclist this is a nightmare as it tends to build up on crosshatch and makes filtering extra dangerous.

I agree it's not particularly helpful we just use rock salt to describe both materials though.

There’s only so many gritters, and the budget is only so big

The priority is about the order that routes are gritted, under normal conditions we could expect footpaths to be gritted eventually

Knowledge is good. But that salting was not sexist. Words have lost all meaning at this point.

OK but hear me out. Find Church's chicken on a map and then go to street view.

It's because they are authoritarians at heart and they look to companies and government regulation as big hammers

Actually what people need to do is look out for themselves and their families. Nobody gets their rent paid this month because they were morally progressive. Actually we have very little responsibility towards one another, as evidenced by the fact that our moms were the last people to pay a bill or solve a problem for us.

You have kids in school today who lost a year of instructional time, are graduating into historic inflation and a recession, who can't afford a house, who likely will struggle to make good on their college investments....but people think they "need" to learn about something beyond what puts money in their pocket. It's a really pathetic ideology to think that anyone "needs" a religion or philosophy. If you are living on your own and working you don't need a damn thing more than the skills you sell to an employer. Because nobody is giving you jack shit in return.

Ok how about this, “the implementation of road salting disproportionately benefits men over women” better?

How about "they salted commercial roads before rural roads" since that is clearly the most descriptive and the only one free of inference.

I’m not talking specifically about the pandemic or during lockdown - that was someone else. Someone made a comment in response to the pandemic comment that indicated they didn’t believe that women use more toilet paper than men, I added my comment with sources and reasoning saying women do. Then you joined the conversation and totally ignored the direction the talk had gone in - if you wanted to discuss the pandemic specifically, maybe reply to the person who made the comment about the pandemic in the first place? Not to me, when I was discussing toilet paper use based on gender in response to someone else’s comment??

And babies drink formula, but last I checked a two month old infant isn’t getting up and making themselves a bottle. If you couldn’t figure out the meaning “use formula” based on the conversation then I dunno what to tell you. Congrats on being pedantic to the point of derailing a conversation, I guess?

Limited resources.

You have X amount of grit to cover Y number of roads or Z number of pathways. Which has more traffic and which is more prone to fatal accidents without grit?

Obviously the roads are going to get priority and even then with footpaths which ones are priority to be gritted the one down empty street or the one outside a school?

It's not sexism it's prioritizing resourcres and managing risk.

To give an example here the first thing that get's grit is the biggest roads and paths to emergency services like hospitals or fire departments. Then smaller roads and things like common routes to schools and so on.

Yep nothing sexist just prioritizing on the most heavily used routes who'd have thunk it.

I see. So women are bad at walking in snow. This is my takeaway.

I personally want to work in a world where what you're saying is true.

Unfortunately, the reality is that in some sectors, in order to feed your family, some people may find themselves required to put up with illegal abuses of power in order to be allowed to keep their jobs, or face other barriers that limit them unfairly.

If you think those barriers and abuses don't exist, well, congratultions on your lottery win, sir.

I must say, this is one of the best examples and explanations of systemic racism that I've ever come across. reddit does have it's moments of magic.

I’m my experience. Women can wear whatever they want. While us men have to wear a full suit and coat in the unbearable summer. Then we get to see commercials complaining how much us men stink in the summer time.

I believe the investigation/test was done with the explicit motive to check if there was gender based biases affecting the system. It was an audit the local government was conducting on themselves to question the status quo of how cities are run. A system doesn't need to be sexist in intent to be sexist in impact. If a lot of systems like urban planning and road cleaning were put into place at a time where it was only men making the decisions, don't you think there may have been blind spots? And doesn't it make sense to go looking for those blind spots because by definition you don't know where they are unless you look?

Did you even read it? The investigation found that women were more likely to trip chain (i.e. take multiple stops on their daily journeys that required exiting the car). E.g. leave work, pick up dry cleaning, pick up kids from school, drop them off at extracurricular activities. They were also found to do more walking in the vicinity of the home. More time spent walking means greater chances you will slip and fall.

‘Twas but a joke

Can I introduce you to the concept of economics (I.e. the study of scarcity and it’s implications)?

Absolutely, just as soon as I can induce you to read the article.

There you might learn that the council of Cambridgeshire is going to spend money on a review of the current gritting network to ensure that it is up-to-date and cost effective, as slip-and-fall claims that occur on the roads and sidewalks that go unsalted in favor of more major thouroughfares against the city cost money that might otherwise be saved if these sidewalks and residential roads took more of a precedence and potentially save money in the long run by implementing a more equitable and efficient system.

No where does it state that the service to major roads will be cut. Intentional, scientifically executed oversight of government services are necessary and if it takes a bit of a kick in the ass to make it happen, so be it.

>Unfortunately, the reality is that in some sectors, in order to feed your family, some people may find themselves required to put up with illegal abuses of power in order to be allowed to keep their jobs, or face other barriers that limit them unfairly.

That's the reason behind my sentiment.

You people....never stop....like evangelical Christians that think Monster Energy has satanic messaging. This can arguably be a public safety issue for pedestrians, but it is certainly not a gender issue. And even if it is a gender issue that doesn't make it sexist in any way shape or form. Unless of course anything that disproportionately impacts women is sexist. In which case, affirmative action is sexist, and pregnancy is sexist, and breast cancer is sexist. Of course that term isn't helpful to describe patterns that affect genders differently, which is why nobody uses it that way.

Frame it as a public health issue if you want, I really don't care. There is an argument to call affirmative action racist, but pregnancy and breast cancer are biological processes, not rules/systems created by society. No one is calling them sexist. There are plenty of issues in society that disproportionately hurt men that need to be resolved too and until there is an alternative term that is well known, I will happily call the draft and handling of men's mental health sexist too. Why can't we say that gender affects people's quality of life in different ways and try to address that? You don't need malicious people to make a certain demographic's lives worse.

The chicken place isn't being called racist. That's where you're misunderstanding things. It's pointing out an ongoing symptom of systemic racism. Why do you think "propensity to eat out" correlates with race?

I agree entirely, you should recognize it as a symptom rather than a root cause, that’s actually my point.