More woke madness or…

…maybe this one makes sense ?

the world has gone mad… two-man whatever… seems fine with me…
surely there are more important matters for folk to be dealing with…

Don’t get distracted by this type of reporting - it is intended to rile a certain type of person.

In reality what does it actually matter?


I heartily agree @Mat_Davies … much more important to find just the right biscuits :rofl: :+1:


It matters because every time a person or company caves into this nonsense, it emboldens the nutters behind it.


Yes, I do agree and I am probably the most anti-woke person around but in this particular case I can see a point of calling ‘delivery men’ ‘delivery people’ or ‘delivery staff’ or whatever for no other reason than using correct syntax (if that’s the correct word !) rather than assuming all deliveries are made by blokes.
I await an onslaught….

1 Like

Of course, to be perfectly correct we shouldn’t use “human race” but “huperson race”… :rofl: :rofl: :roll_eyes: :roll_eyes:

Huperson-beings… not human beings… and as for humane… … hupane… or hupersane or… what… ???

1 Like

why not just say folk… delivery folk, post folk, folkfolk… works for me… :rofl:

I think you have fallen for their trap.

In reality does it really matter - as a point of accuracy Men would not necessarily be correct.

If it were reported as. " Argos correct long standing inaccuracy" would people be so opinionated?


Is there any evidence of Argos having female delivery staff?

Also, you’ll never see the phrase “Two woman lift” as that’s a one man lift…

There really is no earthly reason not to change “two man” to “two person” in this context and it is much more inclusive.


Language is important - we avoid the word “spastic” in describing people with cerebral palsy because, although a correct medical term, it acquired a very negative meaning.

Many groups in in society get discriminated against - the less able, women, LGBTQ+, the non-christian, non-whites - if a simple change in language, in this case from “men” to “persons” can be more inclusive what is the harm?

What is it to be anti-woke anyway? Look at the sort of role or training that the Tories scorn - diversity officers or equality training.

As far as I can see the Tories actively want a world where no one has any righhts especially  the less advantaged. They want  wheelchair users to be excluded because they can’t insist on access, they want  women, or people with foreign sounding names to not even get selected for interview, much less the job, they want  employers to pay people a pittance and to be able to sack people on a whim (I am absolutely sure the “bonfire of EU red tape” will include worker protections) - and they want there to be no avenue of redress because there is no one to whom you can complain.

The tories are in it for themselves and the 1%, no one else. We’re pretty much all sub-human in their eyes.


or even sub-hufolk/sub-huperson in their eyes… :roll_eyes:

let’s face it, Tories seem to think the rest of us are Rubbish…

But is it inaccurate? It may be tradition though.

In France I believe “livreur” works for any persuasion.

She is called a livreuse.

Don’t bring French gendering of words into this as it appears to be totally random with the male genitalia being “feminine” and vice versa. :rofl:

1 Like

These RW newspapers are the biggest wokers (if thats a word) totally aware of the s… they a spewing.

or just simply… “I had a delivery or I’m waiting for a delivery”? no need mostly at all to “genderise” stuff unnecessarily…

If a lady delivers flowers or parcels etc to my house she is a ‘delivery lady’.
That is the correct terminology, nowt to do with wokeness.