Blog | Viewsbank


What if you could change your body to that of the opposite sex for just a day? Would you do it?

Poll (submitted by Manseydoll - wins £10) results are pretty evenly split, with 55% of respondents saying, "Sure, I'd switch for a day," and 45% saying, "No, thank you." 

Reasons to explore the opposite sex, if only for a day, might include stereotypical gender assumptions like women wanting to understand what it is like to stress a little bit less about their superficial looks.  Men might want to know what it is like to get small courtesies paid to them without seeming to do anything to ask for it.  Boys might want to know what it is like to be allowed to be quiet and reserved in the classroom.  Girls might like to know what it is like to be picked first in gym class.

Gender stereotypes are still present in today's world, but the fact that 45% of respondents were not interested in switching temporarily says that the gender divide might be coming to an end. Or, at least we're getting closer to understanding one another a bit better and realizing that neither gender has it completely easy.

Reasons to remain?  Men understand the pressures that women go through to look like they belong in a magazine. Women understand that being macho might be just as much of an emotional burden as being skinny.

Perhaps the 55% who would switch think that doing so would make it even more clear to them what they can do to help bring down the glass ceiling and raise more emotionally engaged men.

Tell us what your reasoning was!  Would you switch sex for a day?  Why or why not?

UK Communities wish for additional protection against Ebola

With the global scare of the Ebola outbreaks, it is of no great surprise that many of our community wish to see additional precautions being implemented in our entry points.  

A large majority (92%) of respondents Manseydoll's poll submission would like to see screening take place for all people traveling from Ebola-affected areas.  Perhaps by screening for a basic symptom of fever, a potential outbreak in the UK could be mitigated.  Only 8% of respondents do not feel this is a justifiable move to take.
With Ebola, a fever is supposed to be one of the sure-fire tests for the infectious nature of the disease.  A fever of greater than 38.6° C, along with other symptoms which would need to be self-identified by passengers (such as headache, muscle aches, and abdominal pain), and travel from infected areas, should be key signs that additional precautions need to be taken with that person.  Knowing that, it seems like taking the temperature of each incoming passenger from an infected area should be a simple precaution to take.
However, it should be noted that a recent study sponsored by the World Health Organization, found that 12.9% of confirmed or probable cases of Ebola patients showed no sign of a fever (as defined as 38°C in the study).
And this piece of information is no newcomer to the studies of Ebola.  In the 2001 Uganda outbreak, multiple studies cited the occurrence of a fever in only 85-88% of infected patients.
So, while a fever might not be the ultimate sign of an infectious Ebola case, it does seem to be a high factor to consider... and taking the temperature of incoming passengers seems still to be desired by the masses.

As usual, let us know what you think!

COMPETITION! Best ACTION photo and caption could win you a GoPro!

Enter the Viewsbank GoPro giveaway right here!

After extensive voting, you wanted to have the GoPro up for grabs. So now, we're telling you how you could win one!

It's simple;

All you have to do is upload your best 'Action' shot and a caption (doesn't have to be funny but it may help!) in the comments below.

But there's a catch, your submission cannot contain any pets you can't ride! That's too easy. . .

So, get submitting! Competition closes on Friday at 3PM and we will then pick 10 finalists for people to vote on.
We will then announce the winner on Monday! 



The competition is now CLOSED!

PLEASE VOTE BELOW FOR YOUR FAVOURITE ENTRY! And tell a friend! Voting closes Monday morning!

*Update 2*

Voting module now removed!

And the winner with the most votes is. . . Catiemoo!

Thank you all so much for your submissions. I think we'll do another one soon!



Despite the easiness of online shopping, you'd still prefer to go to the shops!

We're now more likely to talk to family in a 160 character text than we are to actually call them. We are even approaching a time when couples are more likely to have met online than in person, with instances already recorded where a couple has never met face-to-face until their wedding day -- and made the marriage last!

Yet, there are still some areas in our lives where we seem to prefer to stay unplugged. The latest being grocery shopping.

According to a poll submitted by Sagittarian03 last week, 82% attest that grocery shopping in-store rather than online is more convenient, with 18% saying they prefer to do so online. Why is that?

First, it's worth noting that ordering groceries online isn't possible everywhere in the country, making doing so more of an inconvenience as one may end-up having to drive past a grocery store in order to pick-up your online order.

Another area is that we as consumers seem to prefer to be able to examine a product ourselves if we're planning on eating it. A great (and delicious) example of this that has been in place for years is restaurants that display pies, rather than keeping them refrigerated in the back and simply offering a list of their offerings. Being able to see the pie themselves makes the consumer more likely to buy, and can also help them determine what type they wish to purchase.

It should be noted, though, that while in-store shopping is preferred, we imagine many consumers are none-too-satisfied with the in-store experience, making improvements a must for these poll results to stay in favour of the brick-and-mortar locations. Things like isle width, parking, and the checkout process are consistently areas of complaint for customers.

Let us know what you think!

user picture
Which Downton Abbey character are you?

7 years ago by James_Admin

Which Downton Abbey character are you?

Thank you to everyone who has taken part in the quiz. Congratulations goes to Roger45020 you have been chosen as the winner of the DVD boxset of series 1-4. Though the winner has already been picked you can still take the quiz and feel free to let us know your result in the comments section. 

Downton Abbey Quiz...

Powered by Typeform

Poll results say 69% of you are satisfied with your amount of alone time!

In a recent poll submitted by Manseydoll, 69% of respondents stated they were satisfied with their levels of alone time.  The other 31% of people said they felt they got either too much or too little alone time. 

It seems based on this response that the average person is paying attention to their needs well enough to set aside whatever time is necessary for them to live full lives.

Introverts need more alone time, in order to "recharge" their social batteries, while extroverts are often seen as needing more time interacting with others in order to do the same.  An introvert is likely to need more alone time, while an extrovert might not need any in comparison.  This survey implies that as the idea of introverts and extroverts are becoming more well known and understood by the masses, people are paying attention to the levels they need in order to stay functioning properly.

Introverts can feel drained by social interaction, which is one of the reasons they may choose to shy away from large gatherings.  However, most introverts still gain positive experiences from being with other people.  It is possible that within the 31% of people who said they got too much or too little alone time there is an introvert who knows they need more social interaction in order to live a full life.  

The same goes in the other direction.  Even the most extroverted of individuals still needs some downtime to clean the bathroom... not exactly an activity worthy of a party, though there are probably some who have tried it. 

Tell us your extrovert tale or share your introverted nature which demands more peace and quiet.  Either way, make sure you pay attention to your needs as well as 69% of respondents do!

Most communities would welcome Banksy art; some would still call it vandalism.

Banksy is a name well known in the UK, but whether it is considered the name of an artist or a criminal is still up for some debate.

It seems, based on the recent poll that you voted in, that the majority of respondents would consider the middle-aged man who goes by the pseudonym of Banksy to be an artist.  Seventy-five percent of those answering the question, "If street artist Banksy were to stencil a grafitti on your property or in your street, would you be please about this?" did so with an affirmative response.  The other quarter of respondents would not be pleased with street art from such an acclaimed person on or near their property.

Banksy's intentions seem to be filled with empowering the common people, taking away the elitism of art and power from a precious few. "When you go to an art gallery you are simply a tourist looking at the trophy cabinet of a few millionaires," he wrote in Wall and Piece.

His style is distinctive, and various pieces of original artwork have sold for hundreds of thousands of pounds.  Given buyers such as Christina Aguilera and rising price tags over the years of Banksy's career, it is no wonder that there are plenty of people who would welcome his handiwork in their neighborhood.  Selling a house with a mural attached has been tried, though.  That tactic did see some issues, though, so if any of the 75% of positive respondents are just looking for an easy sale, be warned.

No matter what the answer is about how welcome Banksy might be in your area, though, it is safe to say that it would get people talking. Banksy might be anti-war, anti-capitalism, anti-establishment, but he's certainly not anti-conversation.... just not on Facebook, twitter, or in a gallery. 

Would you try to sell a Banksy original? Let us know!

Do you spend too much time on social media? 80% of you said yes!

Every minute of the day, millions of people around the world check their favorite social media outlet.

On Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Tumblr and all other variations, they read about minute details in the lives of people they barely know but once accepted as 'friends.' And every day, that time could be spent more productively.
At least that's what the vast majority of people think, according to our newest research. When our members were asked by Shawbags81 whether social media plays too large of a part in our lives, no less than 80 percent answered with an emphatic 'yes.' 

In other words, the poll supports a general feeling of fatigue with social media that's slowly been spreading in society. Google 'social media fatigue,' and no less than 19 million results will pop up, ranging from scholarly articles about the psychology behind social media to how-to's on how to deal with it.

According to our poll, dealing with social media has an easy solution: put down your phone or step away from your computer, and focus on something more productive instead.

But that's much more easily said than done. As much as we realize that we probably shouldn't spend a half hour snooping on that acquaintance we haven't seen since school, in most cases, the allure of doing just that is simply too much. And so we waste another hour of social media, while at the same time feeling unhappy with ourselves for doing so.

The comfort in our poll results is that if you feel that way, you're not alone. Social media fatigue is clearly a wide-spread problem, meaning that more people are beginning to focus on possible solutions. The future is looking brighter than it seems!

Let us know what you think!

user picture
Theatre or Cinema?

7 years ago by James_Admin

Theatre or Cinema?

It's Friday night. You're out of work, looking for a relaxing night with your significant other. Where do you go?

According to votes on a poll last week submitted by Manseydoll the answer to that question is not necessarily obvious. While the cinema remains a viable options for many looking to spend a fun evening, a slight majority of respondents (52 percent) actually prefer going to the theatre with all conditions being equal and money not being an issue.

There are a number of reasons for this surprising result. One, our poll was taken after a disappointing summer at the movies, where American blockbusters like Hercules and The Maze Runner tanked while their domestic counterparts like Grace of Monaco didn't fare much better. Fatigue with the ever-growing number of superhero, science fiction and teen flick themes may have pushed a growing audience to the theatre.

There is also the difference in culture between the two options. Movies are often seen as a low-culture option, a date venue for teenagers rather than an exciting evening for professionals looking to relax. Theatre, on the other hand, brings with it something you can tell your co-workers about on Monday.

That's especially the case considering some of cinema's greatest stars, ranging from Sir Ian McKellen to Elijah Wood, continue to dabble in stage acting. The man behind Gandalf certainly seems a lot more approachable and human on stage than he does on the big screen.

Whatever the reason, our poll shows that reports of theatre's demise are greatly exaggerated. It remains a viable option for England's public, and as such will remain an important consideration for anyone looking for a fun evening.

Let us know what you think! 

user picture
Should inhaler prescriptions be free?

7 years ago by James_Admin

Should inhaler prescriptions be free?

Inhalers are a vital part of everyday life for millions of people suffering from Asthma worldwide. Yet, with the prices for prescriptions in England increasing this year

According to our most recent poll results thanks to Nicola1's submitted poll, the answer is a clear 'yes.' In fact, no less than 88 percent of respondents believe that inhalers should not cost anything for those suffering from asthma., these important medical tools are becoming less and less affordable. Should those suffering from asthma receive free prescriptions?

It's a reasonable request, but one that may be more difficult to realize than most consumers think. An estimated 300 million people worldwide suffer from asthma, with over 5 million of them living in England alone. Asthma inhalers can go for as much as 150 pounds, suggesting a loss of 750 million pounds if they were to become free. That's a significant loss for the inhaler industry.
Nonetheless, one cannot help but notice the human element of the problem. Of the 5 million people suffering from asthma in England, how many can realistically afford a regular new inhaler? And if they cannot afford it, what are the consequences? Asthma UK, the leading charity of the field in England, suggests that a person dies from an asthma attack every 10 seconds.
While making inhaler prescriptions free for those suffering from asthma would not completely eradicate that problem, it could significantly lessen the danger that millions of Englanders live with every single day. The price of insurance may rise slightly, as the industry would have to account for a loss of profits. But our poll result indicate clearly that for the majority of respondents, that would be a price worth paying.

Let us know what you think? Should it just stop there?