1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

New Downing Street adviser called for 'universal contraception' to stop 'permanent underclass'

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Morninglover, Feb 16, 2020.

  1. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    From the Sun's political editor

    "No10 standing rock solid by Andrew Sabisky this morning. Refusing to criticise his controversial comments on eugenics etc in any way, and wouldn’t even say the Transport Secretary was speaking for the Govt when he distanced himself from them yesterday. Interesting tactic."
  2. nizebaby

    nizebaby Star commenter

    The Sun. Interesting.
  3. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    An oxymoron!
    slingshotsally, towncryer and colpee like this.
  4. Burndenpark

    Burndenpark Star commenter

    That exactly, they are looking for the headline about the very small number of large families living off benefits.

    I would love for someone to tell me how common this problem is - I mean data not anecdote.
    The birth rate for the UK is near replacement levels- so I don't see how it can be so widespread that we have so many families of 3+.
  5. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Burndenpark likes this.
  6. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    It's been below that for a long time:
    slingshotsally and Burndenpark like this.
  7. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Star commenter

    The fertility rate in the UK is currently around 1.7
    There are around 8 million families with dependant children of which about 1 million have three or more children - see https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...families/bulletins/familiesandhouseholds/2018
    Burndenpark likes this.
  8. Orkrider2

    Orkrider2 Star commenter

    I get what you're saying, but lets think about how this 'enforcement of long-term contraception at the onset of puberty' would have to pan out to be effective in preventing an 'underclass'.

    No girl at the age of onset of puberty (ie. say 9-14 years old as a rough range), is capable of supporting herself and a child alone. So any child conceived at that point would potentially be part of the 'underclass' - which I take to mean being reliant solely on others to support them, be that via benefits from the state or the goodwill of family - so you need to enforce contraception across the board regardless of socioeconomic status. Unless of course a girl has someone who comes forward to 'sponsor' her so to speak, to say that if she were to get pregnant, they would be willing to financially support her and any children. Someone like a guardian (bearing in mind that this is happening when she is between 9 and 14).

    And of course, once a woman has reached an age where she feels that she does want to have children, then who decides that any resulting child will not be part of an 'underclass'? Will there be some financial threshold over which a woman has to earn to be able to stop taking the enforced contraception? Or again, would it require the sponsorship of the potential father to say that he is willing to provide for any offspring. Because frankly that's a terrifying scenario.

    One thing I know is that if roles were reversed and the suggestion was that, I don't know, men were forced at 9 years old to take a drug which renders them incapable of ejaculating, and also can cause nausea, weight gain, depression, anxiety, bloating, tenderness in secondary sex organs, insulin resistance, and seriously increased the risk of blood clots, it' be decried as inhuman, barbaric and not given a second thought, even if it were just for the 'underclass'.
  9. Bedlam3

    Bedlam3 Star commenter

    What bizarre things to say. I couldn't quite believe what I was reading. He might need police protection now as he'll have upset an awful lot of people. I do have to wonder if there is something wrong with him such as a mental health illness or autism to be so unaware of what the impact might be of what he has said.
  10. emerald52

    emerald52 Star commenter

    I think he suffers from ‘uphimselfism’ and ‘blinkeredism’. Appalling person.
  11. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    He may have ASD or autistic tendencies perhaps.

    Or he may be one of those weird little men, like Cummings, who seem to be out to take revenge on the world for being born a weird little man.

    Either way, he needs to be somewhere else, doing something else
    slingshotsally and ajrowing like this.
  12. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    The job "ad" was for weirdos and misfits, was it not?

    I guess he sees his role as a stirrer. How long people will put up with that is anybody's guess. I wouldn't be surprised to see him give up politicis in favour of Anglo-Catholicism, becoming either a priest or a monk:

    Kandahar likes this.
  13. bookeater

    bookeater Occasional commenter

    Permanent underclass, mandatory birth control is one leap away from eugenics.
    His ideas for control sounds very reactionary. But because he is " a protected species " being a Cummings weirdo " nothing will happen.

  14. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    Apparently Sabisky has just resigned.

    Good thing too!
    Jamvic, towncryer and lanokia like this.
  15. bookeater

    bookeater Occasional commenter

  16. monicabilongame

    monicabilongame Star commenter


    "By now, Andrew Sabisky’s views on eugenics and ‘race’ are well known. The Downing Street adviser, who is part of Dominic Cummings’s “misfits and weirdos” recruitment for Boris Johnson’s government, has made numerous appalling comments in the past on those subjects.

    But Sabisky has also expressed views on other matters surrounding governance. In one old BBC video, for example, he shares his opinions on the elderly and military spending. His attitude towards these issues does nothing to dispel the fear that he’s completely unfit to be anywhere near government – including a Conservative one."
    slingshotsally likes this.
  17. bookeater

    bookeater Occasional commenter

    So not protected! Who pushed him? Answers on the back of a stamp please.
  18. burajda

    burajda Star commenter

    It will be interesting to see what happens with those who are cast adrift or sacrificed by Boris' strong government. Who will emerge as the Prince across the Water and lead the Tory resistance to Johnson? He's got plenty of enemies who may be biding their time. With such power, if and when it starts to unravel, there will only be Boris to blame.
  19. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    blazer and littlejackhorner like this.
  20. Jude Fawley

    Jude Fawley Star commenter

Share This Page