The city of Liverpool was created in 1207 when King John granted a Royal Charter which was written in Latin. Liverpool was once the "Second City of Empire", eclipsing even London for commerce at times. Liverpool's Walker Art Gallery is the national gallery of the North and houses one of the best collections of European art outside London. Liverpool has the largest collection of Grade II-listed buildings outside London. The city has 2,500 listed buildings and 250 public monuments. Liverpool's Anglican Cathedral is the largest cathedral in Britain and the fifth largest in the world. It was designed by Giles Gilbert Scott in 1904. The city has a second cathedral - the Metropolitan Cathedral, which was designed by Frederick Gibberd after the Second World War. The Liverpool and Manchester Railway was the first successful passenger-carrying railway in the world. Trials for Stephenson's Rocket were carried out at Rainhill in 1829. Birkenhead Park (designed by Joseph Paxton) was used as a template for both Sefton Park (designed by Frenchman Edouard Andre) and also New York's Central Park. The name Mersey most likely derives from the Anglo Saxon words "maerse" which means boundary and "ea" meaning river. It was likely thought of as the boundary river between the ancient kingdoms of Nothumbria and Mercia. The Mersey (officially) begins at the confluence of the rivers Tame and Goyt in Stockport and is 70.3 miles long and 3 miles wide at it's widest point (between Ellesmere Port and Hale Village). During very high spring tides the Mersey has a "bore" which will run from Hale as far as Warrington. The Mersey is considered sacred by British Hindus, and worshipped in a similar way to the River Ganges. Festival of Immersion ceremonies are held annually on the river, in which clay figures representing the Hindu Lord Ganesha, the elephant deity riding a mouse, are submerged in the river from a ferry boat. Followers throw flowers, pictures and coins into the river
What’s in a name?—The Controversy Over “Manholes” please log in to view this image Occupational gender segregation matters and can be attributed to a number of factors. But, a significant factor is cultural. Jobs are gendered. Often not in any necessarily straight-forward way, but jobs acquire gendered attributes and meanings. In fact, occupational gender segregation probably plays a key role in producing our understandings of what is “masculine” or “feminine” in the first place. As Joan Acker famously argued, the “abstract worker” is imagined to be a man (here). This idea is perpetuated in a variety of ways—through formal and informal workplace policies, through curricular gender segregation as areas of study acquire “gendered” meaning, through the ways we frame the work itself as demanding a “masculine” or “feminine” strengths and/or sensibilities, and often, through things as simple as job titles. The feminist movement fought long and hard to have firemen referred to as firefighters, policemen as police officers, etc. The lack of gender-neutral language was a subtle, but symbolic, way through which women were culturally excluded from certain occupations (even in cases where no laws or formal policies necessarily precluded women’s entry). This is a shift that is–to put it mildly–incomplete. For instance, many high schools, colleges and universities still refer to incoming cohorts of students as “freshmen,” while others have opted for the more gender-neutral language of “first-years” (though not without the occasional backlash). Language is important. It’s a small part of a larger system of power and inequality that helps to organize our lives. Legal feminist scholars have asked that we rid ourselves of language in laws that reflect gender bias. I know what you’re thinking, but it’s more complicated that clicking Command+F and either replacing “men” with “people” or “men and women” and adding “/she” to the “he’s” or replacing them with “them/their” instead. The tricky part has been when we literally lack gender-neutral language for something. As one journalist put it, “Some gender-specific words just aren’t that easy to replace” (here). While firefighter, police officer, and first-year might have been interpreted as easy changes, more difficulty surrounded words and positions like: ombudsman, penmanship, servicemen. please log in to view this image And this brings us to the “manhole.” In crafting gender-neutral language in Washington state, the person in charge of revising the code to rid it of gender biased language was stumped. “There was no clear alternative to manhole… Revisers considered utility hole, but that doesn’t connote size like manhole does. One might only be able to stick a wire through a ‘utility hole’… but a manhole—that’s for humans” (here). Aside from the fact that there are probably a lot of not-so-complicated linguistic solutions to this issue (a response on Ms. Magazine’s post on this topic suggests “sewer access cover” or “_____ access cover” depending upon where the “manhole” leads), it’s an interesting issue. Does it really matter that we find a new name for “manholes”? Manhole presumes that it’s a hole for men. And in fact, jobs that require using manholes (AKA “human access tunnels”) are jobs that are disproportionately occupied by men (I’ve posted on similar issues before: here and here). So, things associated with this kind of work acquire a sort of masculine cultural patina. This is why we think of hard hats as masculine (or “macho” depending on who you ask), or tools and tool belts. please log in to view this image This is why “Men Working” signs exist as well–though like “manhole,” these signs too are sometime protested (here and here). It’s not that these objects are somehow naturally “masculine.” Rather, they acquire gendered meaning through segregation, use, and display. So, the use of “manhole” and “Men Working” signs are more than a matter of symbolism. They are a small part of the process through which occupational spaces are gendered. They reinforce the notion that it is really only men who can do the work required beneath “manholes” or the physical labor required on sites that display “Men Working” signs. So, challenging the naming of “manholes” is important because it is one small piece of a larger project of opening them up (pun intended) to women–not just legally, but culturally as well. please log in to view this image
Any feminist who makes changing the term 'man hole' into somehting 'gender neutral' a goal in their life, needs to be shot out of a ****ing cannon.
That's better. It's believed the centre of the galaxy is a massive black hole, but that's a long, long way away. A black hole is like a Cosmic Greez and eats anything that can't run away. We'd be right up **** creek if we had one in the solar system.
As I made clear a few days ago, I think that language is important in the way it can restrict or direct people's means of expression. There are limits, though- and objecting to a term like manhole is just ridiculous. Who on earth thinks that because it's referred to in that way that only men can use it? What is it with the gender-neutral brigade? God only knows how they get on in Romance languages where almost everything has a gender.
But that's their problem, as it's their association, not ours. I don't hear the word manhole and associate it with a clout. I'd rather not make the correlation either given it's the entrance to a ****ing sewer...
Feminazis mate. Women like that flute who ruined the lawyers reputation the other month for having the temerity to say her photo was nice.
‘God is not a he or a she’, says first female bishop to sit in House of Lords Rachel Treweek, bishop of Gloucester, says she wants to ‘gently challenge’ people The whole thing is getting crazy..women no longer respect men
I thought you meant the one in that recent film with Matthew Mohanahy (sp). Btw, if a big, **** off black hole just suddenly appeared off Jupiter, as in the film Interstellar, wouldn't that rather ****-up the orbits of all the planets and meteorites and cause a million more Yucatans? This is the wrong thread again, isn't it?
Cant say I've seen the film. If a black hole appeared off Jupiter then I think we'd all get sucked in rather than it just having an effect on the orbits...
