Help & FAQs    Search BCF    Members    Groups    Events Calendar
Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


No place for hate on the Interwebs!

 Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 19:50 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm all for equal outcome but that does entail raising the suicide rate for women and forcing them to die in wars against their will...
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

BTTD
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:16 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
No one argues that there are no female executives; the point is that women are grossly underrepresented there.

And the point remains that it is not due to some made up subconscious bias.
But do carry on.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

rebeltaz
Renault 5 Driver



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 21:47 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:

Yes, we discussed it already a few posts ago. I have nothing new to add.


Because I am still right.

cdlxxvi wrote:

We can start with "Gender stereotypes and workplace bias", Heilman 2012.


I am not going to base my debate on a study paper that is mostly conjecture being stated as fact.

This paragraph here, for example:

Gender stereotypes and workplace bias wrote:

Research has provided evidence that there is a perceived lack of fit between the demands of high-level
organizational positions and characterizations of women. In early work on this issue, it was found that when
respondents, both male and female, were asked to identify the attributes of men in general, of women in general and of
successful managers, the characterization of successful managers were more congruent with the characterization of
men than of women (Schein, 1973, 1975).


Not sure if you are aware of this, but men and women are different animals. We think differently; we react differently; we speak differently; we harbor differing emotions; we are two distinct genders with very specific qualities that fit our genders, generally speaking. Sure, there are exceptions to that rule. That doesn't negate the fact that that rule is generally correct.

Having said that, you want to argue that the workplace is biased against women because the traits needed to succeed are inherently attributed to masculinity? That is ridiculous. That is the equivalent of saying that I'm not good at chess, so we need to change the way it's played so that I can have a fair shot! This is the problem with a whole generation who has grown up being taught that everyone is a winner and there are no losers. [As evidenced in spades by the liberal reaction to losing the 2016 US Presidential Election.] Everyone is not suited for every thing, nor should we pretend that they are. Men are better at some things, just like women are better at other things - generally speaking. I don't care if you believe that or not. It is; it always has been; and it always will be. That doesn't mean that men cannot do the things that women do or vise versa. It only means that in general, the work works the way it does because of science... Biology.


cdlxxvi wrote:

No one argues that there are no female executives; the point is that women are grossly underrepresented there.


As I have already discussed (to which you say you have nothing to add), so what if women are "underrepresented?" There is nothing that says that in real life, all aspects have to be represented equally by each and every race/gender/creed. Women are underrepresented because they choose to be - individually and personally. Believe it or not, women are thinking human beings capable of making their own decisions. Those decisions just so happen to quite often be raising a family or choosing a career other than the corporate rat race so often sought after by materialist people.
____________________
Derek Tombrello
www.ShelbyCycle.com (for profit)
www.RobotsAndComputers.com (just for fun)
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

rebeltaz
Renault 5 Driver



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 21:55 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
No one argues that there are no female executives; the point is that women are grossly underrepresented there.


I often wonder...

* when a woman is passed over for a promotion, it's because of sexism....
* when a black man is passed over for a promotion, it's because of racism....
* when a black woman is passed over for a promotion, it's sexist racism....
* when a member of the alphabet group is passed over for a promotion, it's because of homophobia...
* who the hell is to blame when a straight, white man is passed over for that same promotion?


and before you go getting your panties in a wad... I have nothing against anyone personally as a person regardless of race/sex/creed/etc....
____________________
Derek Tombrello
www.ShelbyCycle.com (for profit)
www.RobotsAndComputers.com (just for fun)
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

cdlxxvi
Nearly there...



Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 22:20 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
jnw010 wrote:
cdlxxvi wrote:
No one argues that there are no female executives; the point is that women are grossly underrepresented there.

And the point remains that it is not due to some made up subconscious bias.
But do carry on.


You undoubtedly intended to cite some quality search here, but somehow it didn't show. Care to try again?


rebeltaz wrote:
cdlxxvi wrote:

Yes, we discussed it already a few posts ago. I have nothing new to add.


Because I am still right.


[citation missing]

rebeltaz wrote:

cdlxxvi wrote:

We can start with "Gender stereotypes and workplace bias", Heilman 2012.


I am not going to base my debate on a study paper that is mostly conjecture being stated as fact.

This paragraph here, for example:

Gender stereotypes and workplace bias wrote:

Research has provided evidence that there is a perceived lack of fit between the demands of high-level
organizational positions and characterizations of women. In early work on this issue, it was found that when
respondents, both male and female, were asked to identify the attributes of men in general, of women in general and of
successful managers, the characterization of successful managers were more congruent with the characterization of
men than of women (Schein, 1973, 1975).


Not sure if you are aware of this, but men and women are different animals. We think differently; we react differently; we speak differently; we harbor differing emotions; we are two distinct genders with very specific qualities that fit our genders, generally speaking. Sure, there are exceptions to that rule. That doesn't negate the fact that that rule is generally correct.

Having said that, you want to argue that the workplace is biased against women because the traits needed to succeed are inherently attributed to masculinity? That is ridiculous. That is the equivalent of saying that I'm not good at chess, so we need to change the way it's played so that I can have a fair shot! This is the problem with a whole generation who has grown up being taught that everyone is a winner and there are no losers. [As evidenced in spades by the liberal reaction to losing the 2016 US Presidential Election.] Everyone is not suited for every thing, nor should we pretend that they are. Men are better at some things, just like women are better at other things - generally speaking. I don't care if you believe that or not. It is; it always has been; and it always will be. That doesn't mean that men cannot do the things that women do or vise versa. It only means that in general, the work works the way it does because of science... Biology.

It's not easy to find an actual point in the above, but I assume that you are trying to argue that certain physical differences justify a male-dominated society.
No one argues that such differences exist; it is the jump to the conclusion that they somehow should result in a half of society being subordinate to the other half that needs a very strong factual backing which, interestingly, we are still waiting for.

rebeltaz wrote:

cdlxxvi wrote:

No one argues that there are no female executives; the point is that women are grossly underrepresented there.


As I have already discussed (to which you say you have nothing to add), so what if women are "underrepresented?" There is nothing that says that in real life, all aspects have to be represented equally by each and every race/gender/creed. Women are underrepresented because they choose to be - individually and personally. Believe it or not, women are thinking human beings capable of making their own decisions. Those decisions just so happen to quite often be raising a family or choosing a career other than the corporate rat race so often sought after by materialist people.


And what's your source of information on that "choice" of women to be underrepresented and disenfranchised?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:01 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
...I assume that you are trying to argue that certain physical differences justify a male-dominated society.


Assuming we're talking about Western Civilised Nations and not the riff-raff in the rest of the world. Define "male-dominated" pls...

Women seem to be the predominant sex in education, so education is women-dominated... similarly for health and child care.

When it comes to the really important aspects of society men are barely involved at all!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

cdlxxvi
Nearly there...



Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:20 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
HardlyDavidson wrote:
cdlxxvi wrote:
...I assume that you are trying to argue that certain physical differences justify a male-dominated society.


Assuming we're talking about Western Civilised Nations and not the riff-raff in the rest of the world. Define "male-dominated" pls...

Women seem to be the predominant sex in education, so education is women-dominated... similarly for health and child care.

When it comes to the really important aspects of society men are barely involved at all!


What if the opposite is true?

Where it really matters (decision-making and compensation), women are underrepresented supreme. For example, in major UK companies women are a small minority of directors, and get paid only 2/3 of what their male peers earn (Wearing & Wearing 2004).
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

rebeltaz
Renault 5 Driver



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:38 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:

rebeltaz wrote:

Not sure if you are aware of this, but men and women are different animals. We think differently; we react differently; we speak differently; we harbor differing emotions; we are two distinct genders with very specific qualities that fit our genders, generally speaking. Sure, there are exceptions to that rule. That doesn't negate the fact that that rule is generally correct.

It's not easy to find an actual point in the above, but I assume that you are trying to argue that certain physical differences justify a male-dominated society.
No one argues that such differences exist; it is the jump to the conclusion that they somehow should result in a half of society being subordinate to the other half that needs a very strong factual backing which, interestingly, we are still waiting for.


I didn't say anythign about physical traits. I said thinking, acting, emotional...

You know what... nobody has the cogliones to say this, so I will....

If a society is male dominated, maybe it's because thoughout history men have been the ones with the drive, desire and ability to build and create society and everything in it. Yes... I know that women have been instrumental in many areas, but once again, that has always been, historicaly speaking, the excpetion. And do not give me that crap that it's only because we big, bad men wouldn't let them or encourage them. MEN have built this world. Now women want to take it by fiat. I've got an idea... let them build their own, from the ground up, just like we did.

I'm going to stop now before I really piss somebody off... if I haven't already.
____________________
Derek Tombrello
www.ShelbyCycle.com (for profit)
www.RobotsAndComputers.com (just for fun)
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Kawasaki Jimbo
World Chat Champion



Joined: 09 Oct 2015
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:45 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
GlaxoSmithKline boss Emma Walmsley received a 20pc pay jump to £5.9m last year but still took home less than the company’s chief scientific officer.

Britain’s biggest drugmaker revealed in its annual report that Dr Hal Barron was paid £6.6m last year and got both a higher basic salary and annual bonus than the chief executive.

Glaxo said at the time of Ms Walmsley’s appointment that her remuneration was set “at a level to reflect the fact that this was her first chief executive role”.

It was set below the market rate and 25pc less her male predecessor Sir Andrew Witty after investors demanded that her salary be reduced to reflect her experience.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/03/12/gsk-boss-still-paid-less-science-chief-despite-jump-59m/

Andrew Witty left earlier than expected so there was perhaps no obvious candidate to replace him, but GSK has a strong desire to meet equality and diversity targets, hence Emma Walmsley appears to have been given the opportunity to demonstrate her ability before earning "the market rate." Seems fair, although if you were a better qualified male candidate who lost out (I don't know if there were any) you might disagree.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:51 - 01 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
What if the opposite is true?

Where it really matters (decision-making and compensation), women are underrepresented supreme. For example, in major UK companies women are a small minority of directors, and get paid only 2/3 of what their male peers earn (Wearing & Wearing 2004).


So you're only interested in power and money, how very capitalist of you!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kawasaki Jimbo
World Chat Champion



Joined: 09 Oct 2015
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:04 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
(Wearing & Wearing 2004).

I applaud your use of 'sauces' (a link would have been good too) but that's 15 years old.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

chickenstrip
Super Spammer



Joined: 06 Dec 2013
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:09 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
HardlyDavidson wrote:
cdlxxvi wrote:
What if the opposite is true?

Where it really matters (decision-making and compensation), women are underrepresented supreme. For example, in major UK companies women are a small minority of directors, and get paid only 2/3 of what their male peers earn (Wearing & Wearing 2004).


So you're only interested in power and money, how very capitalist of you!


Among the worst types for holding women back.
____________________
Chickenystripgeezer's Biking Life (Latest update 19/10/18) Belgium, France, Italy, Austria tour 2016 Picos de Europa, Pyrenees and French Alps tour 2017 Scotland Trip 1, now with BONUS FEATURE edit, 5/10/19, on page 2 Scotland Trip 2 Luxembourg, Black Forest, Switzerland, Vosges Trip 2017
THERE'S MILLIONS OF CHICKENSTRIPS OUT THERE!
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 03:03 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:


Where it really matters (decision-making and compensation), women are underrepresented supreme. For example, in major UK companies women are a small minority of directors, and get paid only 2/3 of what their male peers earn (Wearing & Wearing 2004).


Indeed, but the jury's still out over whether this is due to structural inequality or social evolution.

Watch The Gender Equality Paradox. It's a really interesting documentary piece by a Norwegian bloke who decided to research the issue, a good handful of years ago when the SJW/feminism craze was at its peak.

He found that there's a whole lot of evidence, from the highest levels of biology and neuroscience, to say that male and female brains really are just different in certain ways.

An interesting snippet of evidence was a study at Cambridge University, wherein children were tested from birth to see what stereotypical male/female behaviours they presented.

Male babies focuses their gaze much more strongly when presented with mechanical and technical toys, while female babies focused their gaze more strongly on human faces. These were kids tested from birth, with zero chance for social cues to imprint on them.

The experiment followed the babies into childhood and beyond (for all I know the experiment is still going). It found that those who exhibited stereotypical male traits as they developed all shared one thing in common: Higher levels of testosterone. Nothing to do with environment or upbringing.

The conclusion of this was the termination of the Nordic Feminist Studies Programme (or something like that - I can't remember exactly what it was called).

Anyway, my main takeaway from this is that there are surely plenty of areas in life where woman naturally just don't tend to drift, and that men have always been wired up to chase power and resources more strongly. Generally speaking, at least.

Solution? Legislate against unfair treatment of others, then let society fit into its own roles. I swear that's how it is already though.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Hetzer
Super Spammer



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
PostPosted: 07:21 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Almost all political/economic systems will only ever be the result of the machinations of a tiny psychopathic/sociopathic minority doing its utmost to best serve its own interests. It's why communism failed, that minority took the concept of a well-meaning individual and corrupted it to its own ends.

The failure to recognize and understand that basic truth is why we have the 'left' and 'right' (and everything in between) and a civilisation that has been little more than a sewer for over 6000 years, generally speaking.

And it's so because the broad mass of humanity has an average IQ of 100. The one clever psychopath/sociopath will always outwit any number of 100-IQ mongs, no matter their empathy. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.

Which isn't to say the good doesn't get its occasional victories, nor that when it does they're always inconsequential.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

BTTD
World Chat Champion



Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 09:00 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
cdlxxvi wrote:
You undoubtedly intended to cite some quality search here, but somehow it didn't show. Care to try again?


No, the problem is that you segregate society into different victim groups with one oppressor and seek to obtain justice for the group by oppressing the individual. I believe that is fundamentally evil and no statistical study is going to change that.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Hetzer
Super Spammer



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
PostPosted: 09:38 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anything that keeps the herd engaged in internecine strife is good for those who rule. Thus they manufacture reasons at every possible opportunity. Or egregiously highlight and exaggerate those that exist naturally.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

AshWebster
Brolly Dolly



Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Karma :
PostPosted: 11:28 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:


Solution? Legislate against unfair treatment of others, then let society fit into its own roles. I swear that's how it is already though.


couldnt agree more.

also fully agree with the rest of your post - men and women are wired differently ON AVERAGE. there are obviously overlapping areas and each individual varies.

there are some key characteristics which most if not all CEOs and high up business leaders have, and on average, men tend to have these more than women.

added onto this, women can give birth and will have to sacrifice part of her job life (unless she is ULTRA driven which is v v rare) in order to raise a family, which is a lot more in her nature than it is for the male

men are willing to sacrifice therir friends, sleep, partners, everything to get to the top. 50 hour weeks for years. women are not. on average.

all you see is the end result and think its just oh society gave the MALES this free money. this kind of thinking is dangerous and you need to have a hard look at yourself
____________________
Honda cg125 J reg peice of shit ---> CB650F ---> 2016 CBR600RR
Ford KA ---> 93' MR2 ---> 94'MR2 ---> 98' Subaru WRX STI Ver 3 (track car)
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

bhinso
World Chat Champion



Joined: 21 Jun 2008
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:23 - 02 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Potential solution is to force everyone to take female hormones, like they're doing in Women's athletics.
Then of course we'll have a completely level playing field Thumbs Up
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

mentalboy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 05 May 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:23 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
AshWebster wrote:


added onto this, women can give birth and will have to sacrifice part of her job life (unless she is ULTRA driven which is v v rare) in order to raise a family, which is a lot more in her nature than it is for the male

men are willing to sacrifice therir friends, sleep, partners, everything to get to the top. 50 hour weeks for years. women are not. on average.



Spot the 20th Century neanderthal! Laughing

There is quite a transatlantic presence posting in this thread, bear in mind that the two cultures are separated by a common language! Socialism to the average American conjures up anything that restricts rampant Capitalism

European women have a marginally better chance of skiving off work to raise kids but, unless they happen to be in a fairly wealthy family both parents work - regardless of whether they are single or otherwise, I have yet to meet a stay-at-home American mother.
____________________
Make mine a Corona.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

mentalboy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 05 May 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:27 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
bhinso wrote:
Potential solution is to force everyone to take female hormones, like they're doing in Women's athletics.
Then of course we'll have a completely level playing field Thumbs Up


Not that Millenials have to concern themselves with that, considering the dropping male testosterone levels. Give it a few decades and the girls will have to shag a gorilla if they want to breed. Laughing
____________________
Make mine a Corona.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 03:48 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now it's progressed from far-right to "dangerous individuals"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48142098

I can't exactly see how dangerous Milo could be, offensive yes...

Still, it made me read a bit more about Farakhan. Nice one, FaceBalls, someone I previously ignored I now have an interest in, Streisand Effect in full force.

Never knew the Nation of Islam were so closely aligned with the Church of Scientology. Obviously I must have missed a meeting!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

bhinso
World Chat Champion



Joined: 21 Jun 2008
Karma :
PostPosted: 11:57 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader who has expressed anti-Semitic views, will also be excluded.
WTF Surprised

And let's not get started on Scientology FFS. That South Park episode on it told me all I needed to know!
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:11 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
The interesting thing with Farakhan is that effectively it's an attack on one of the main, so called "protected minority groups."

The conspiracy theorists reckon he was thrown on the burning book fire literally as a token to say "it's not just far-right white supremacists we're banning!"

Personally Snoop-Dog is not one of the ppl in this world I'd choose to piss off!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Easy-X
Super Spammer



Joined: 08 Mar 2019
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:37 - 04 May 2019    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well there is that branch of radical feminism that doesn't believe trans-women are "real" women, they're pretty left-wing as far as these things go...

The width of the left-wing orthodoxy path for MSM and social media is strangely narrow. Stray one millimetre from it, left or right: banhammer!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 4 years, 357 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
 You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.12 Sec - Server Load: 0.48 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 156.7 Kb