Why the double standards in workplace sexual equality?

Archeron

Before I continue, I would like to say that gender equality is a great thing. Women are great in the workplace, and there are many things that they can do infinitely better than men, and vice versa. Its good to see equality is a very real possibility within the not too distant future. So please do not flame me, this is not a rant about ALL women, just specific groupings that you can come across in workplaces, and which I'm sure many of you have experienced too.

One thing has been bugging me lately, and I’d like to ask you your opinion.

I work in an office as the only bloke surrounded by 10 (yes, TEN) women. My boss is a bloke, but only comes into the office once a week.
As I sit listening to the ladies talking about things that have no interest to me (fashion, soaps, noodle flavours, what they had for dinner last night), I generally keep to myself as there is nothing much I can add to their conversations. Fair enough.
One subject that does come up with annoying regularity though is Men. All men are bastards. All men are useless. All men are stupid. Men cant cook, clean, look after themselves, etc etc etc. This gets tiresome, but for the sake of peace, I remain quiet.
They also profess how they, as women, are wonderful ambassadors for their sexuality, and how they can do as much, or much more than the men in their lives, and they can do it much better too.
The thing that annoys me though, is that when it suits them to revert to the girly girly aspect of being a lady, they use it to full effect. For example, just this morning one of them had a row with her other half on the phone. She and 5 others, that’s not a typo either, 5 others making a total of 6 women including the cryer, ran off the toilet to comfort each other and tell her how her boyfriends a bastard. They remained in there for over an hour while everybody else was up to their eyes in work.

When I do something wrong in work, I get fairly and reasonably bollicked. Fair enough. When a woman cocks up in work, it is explained to them gently what they done wrong, and how they can avoid doing that in the future. When I asked my boss why this is, he told me that the girls in the office are gentle little flowers (his words, used with a wry smile), and will not accept a bollicking like blokes would. As a result, to keep his own life more peaceful, and to avoid “you’re picking on me because I’m a girl, WAAAAAAHHH” type stand offs and cryathons, he just goes down the more peaceful path of least resistance.

Is this not a blatant double standard? Surely, if women are equal in the workplace (and I feel they are) then they should be equal in all regards? I realize that women suffer different sickness and “lady problems”, fair enough, but why should women expect to be treated with kid gloves in a workplace where they themselves consider themselves to be superior to the men around them? Why cant they take it on the chin like everyone else?
Also, if I was to pass comment about “bleedin stupid women, they’ll all useless” I’d be strung from the nearest lamppost, and rightly so. How come women can pass comment like this with impunity, and nobody says a word? Is it because blokes tend not to listen to them in the first place? Sadly this option isn’t available to me as I essentially work in the middle of a swarm of really bitchy wasps.

It is possible that my views on this are skewed, as women I worked with before in other jobs were great craic, and great workers. My current job though, the average age of the women is about 35, and they are a big bunch of egotistical spiteful harpies who seem to be trying to assert themselves in some weird way, so perhaps that’s why its beginning to drive me mental. All I hear for 10 hours a day is this lot twittering on about the most inane subjects while moaning and sniping about everyone they know (including each other when one of them is missing, which is funny).

Anyone else share opinions on this? Perhaps I am just a moany old man now. If so, well, Bah humbug, but I do think that "gender equality in the workplace" can be a bit of a misnomer.

MargeS

I agree 100%.
There is no such thing and never will be gender equality. Women play up on being women too much when it suits!

Karl Hungus

The problem is, not everyone is equal. Lots of people have to be dealt with, and have their needs dealt with, in different ways. So, if a woman needs to be repremanded in a different way to a man in the workplace, I don't see that as being fundamentally different than a person in a wheelchair needing wheelchair access (That's not to suggest that being a woman is a handicap, just to illustrate that there are lots of different circumstances, and they have to be addressed with different measures. ).

I agree with you about is the whole "Men are bastards" talk, that could easily equate to work-place bullying, and I would make a formal complaint about that.

But "Equality" doesn't truly exist.

Zombrex

Archeron wrote: »

Anyone else share opinions on this? Perhaps I am just a moany old man now. If so, well, Bah humbug, but I do think that "gender equality in the workplace" is a bit of a misnomer.

Well do something about it.

If a woman was working in an office with a bunch of men who were constantly making derogatory comments about either her or about women in general, it would be recommend to her to make a formal complaint about it.

Otherwise nothing will happen.

Does your company have a HR department? If it does their should be someone who handles issues of discrimination and harassment.

Otherwise you could ring the Equality Authority (http://www.equality.ie/) and ask them for advice on how to deal with the situation. They have a system where you can make a formal complaint.

Archeron

Wicknight wrote: »

Well do something about it.

If a woman was working in an office with a bunch of men who were constantly making derogatory comments about either her or about women in general, it would be recommend to her to make a formal complaint about it.

Thats a very good point and I appreciate you making it. I am just wondering if this type of scenario is commonplace in workplaces in Ireland.
I've been working for 14 years now, and have never encountered this type of thing before. As I say, through the years I've never encountered any discrimination on the basis of either sex in the workplace, and it was always a comfortable environment to work in. I'm in my current job just 6 months now, and its kind of taken me by surprise at the levels it can reach. Maybe its just the 10 to 1 outnumbered thing, I dont really know.

Red Hand

It could be that you have encountered an isolated pocket of bitchiness, Archeron. I used to work in a laboratory with four women and the amount of sniping and backbiting and hypocritical behaviour amongst three of the four was unbelievable.

And yet, I went back to college for a year and even though my class was predominently female, there was hardly any bitchiness, and the whole class had a good feeling to it.

Of course that could be just down to the fact was women behave differently in college compared to when they are working together in a job with b/fs, mortgages and stress.:p

daveharnett

Interesting post arch.

To be fair, I would say that most women would feel isolated to some extent working in an environment where men are in the vast majority. With the best will in the world, this would be hard to avoid.

If you need some relief from the 'men are stupid' stuff, see the BGRH forum. Men still do it too.

As to your boss and the kid gloves, I'd say a female boss in charge of a lot of men would be equally well advised to tread carefully when singling out one of her subordinates. She would instantly be labelled a bitch and undermined at every oppertunity.

As to the bathroom thing, well that's just women for you

Even if you disagree with all of the above, bear in mind that women have had a pretty raw deal for the vast majority of human history. So what if they get cheaper car insurance?

Still, sucks to be you

Zombrex

Archeron wrote: »

Thats a very good point and I appreciate you making it. I am just wondering if this type of scenario is commonplace in workplaces in Ireland.

Probably.

I'm not sure where this idea came from that people are shocked if they find an ignorant woman or group of women.

I've (unfortunately) known women who have been racist, xenophobic, abusive, bigoted, sexist etc etc

Your claim that gender equality doesn't really exist seems a little puzzling. Equality isn't something that just happens. It happens because people make it happen. Women didn't just say "Right, starting from tomorrow all men have to treat us with respect". It came from women challenging men with ignorant attitudes towards women. And there are still a load of men out there with ignorant ass attitudes towards women.

So if you want this to change you need to do something about it.

It not going to change itself.

nacho libre

Tell them to purchase The Naked man by Desmond Morris.

Archeron

Wicknight wrote: »

I'm not sure where this idea came from that people are shocked if they find an ignorant woman or group of women.

For lack of a better excuse or reason, I'd say its probably scale. I've encountered nasty types too, but not so many in such a small place and I thought that perhaps the demographics of this particular bunch may be playing a part. Bitchiness is not new to me, but pack mentality bitchiness on this scale is.

As another poster says above, I know that its been a long road for women to get where they are now, and more power to them, I hope it continues.
It just annoys me when I see some people hiding (again, for lack of a better word) behind their femininity to avoid the more unpleasant aspects of a given situation, while adamantly proclaiming to the world at large in a very loud voice that they demand to be treated the same in every single way.

Zombrex

Archeron wrote: »

As another poster says above, I know that its been a long road for women to get where they are now, and more power to them, I hope it continues.
It just annoys me when I see some people hiding (again, for lack of a better word) behind their femininity to avoid the more unpleasant aspects of a given situation, while adamantly proclaiming to the world at large in a very loud voice that they demand to be treated the same in every single way.

Who are you talking about? The women in your office, or "women" as a group.

I'm with you if its the former, but I really don't think it has anything to do with the feminist movement.

Archeron

Wicknight wrote: »

Who are you talking about? The women in your office, or "women" as a group.

I'm with you if its the former, but I really don't think it has anything to do with the feminist movement.

OK, fair enough. My complaint is with my own bunch here, not women generally. Til now the women I've worked with have, for the most part been great. Just asking others of they've experiened this type of thing in their jobs and how they feel about the double standard that these type of people seem to believe in.
Perhaps I'm wrong to be discussing equality in such a broad way as this thread is NOT about women in general, but I'm annoyed at the double standards of this particular coven. The reason I make references to the womens movement generally (and my support for it) is that I dont want to come across like a chauvenist twat who is just here complaining about women who are empowered just because I have a bee in my bonnet.

McGinty

Archeon

I am a woman and like you I have experienced a group of similar bitchy women, I also agree with Wicknight, say something, tell them that their constant berating of men is offensive. I used to work with 70 odd men and one other woman, it was tough at first because I so unused to being a minority, but they were great on the whole, one man was too touchy/feely for my liking was always hugging me and put his hand on my arse and when I told him not to he sneered did I not like being touched, basically I said only when someone has my permission, and said if he did it again I'd go to management. I would suggest you speak to the women directly first, and if they don't stop then go to management. Incidentally that man I spoke of stopped and we became good friends and I found working with men much easier. Then when I moved into office work I found a lot of women very bitchy but not all. Also if you speak up and show these women that not all men are bastards, etc it will open their eyes, I think by the sounds of your post they forget you are there, for instance another time when I was a PA the men I was working with forgot I was there and were slagging of women golfers from their local clubs. Best of luck and remember we are not all like that

dr_manhattan

I think - and this is an opinion - that a lot of contemporary "acting out" by irish women is insecure tough talk, and is easily seen through, just like the insecure tough talk of many groups of men.

Unfortunately in same sex groups people fall into roles easily and you can very quickly find conversations where people loudly express opinions in a group, but when later questioned say they didn't really mean them or that, you know, it was just a joke, lighten up.

And it can be very annoying, and i do understand the frustration of the original poster: but it is also just a huge part of office / workplace bull**** that - in my experience - you have to try and ignore, and base your opinions more on one-on-one.

Basically, people are okay. But groups of people are just wierd and self supporting. everyone adopts an opinion and a role.

But this is the thing, and many points have been made above supporting this: as men, we have a lot of social freedoms and support systems that women do not have. For example if we're good at our job, then people respect us: how we do our hair and what heels we wear hardly come into it.

I mean, it's never nice to hear that "all men are bastards". But knowing how bad we *can* be, and knowing that people say these things out of dumb insecurity and a need to sound like carrie bleeding bradshaw or whoever... does it hurt that much?

If it does, then posters above are right, you should act to change it because people need to hear they sound like insulting fools. But change all that crap? Are you that bothered?

Does it really hurt that much?

Here's an example from my experience: I used to work in a large studio, and when i arrived first, i took out my old vintage dirty harry poster, and my vintage barbarella poster. Within a week, i was asked by the studio manager to take the barbarella down as it had been complained about.

A week on the job? sexist? I was mortified and generally apologised. It occurred to me that certain conversations i'd had in the studio might have been misinterpreted. There were chippendales posters and clooney, hasslehof posters around girls desks, even male stripogram calenders, it had just never occured to me that jane fonda in a daft catsuit was offensive...

A year later, i found out who had complained, she told me it herself while we were at a staff do. I couldn't add it up: this girl wore tight revealing gear every day to work... hell she looked like barbarella!

And yeah, it turned out she was embarassed and sorry but she didn't know the movie and blah blah blah... wierd. She seemed genuinely sorry but it just seems like the wierdest thing to me. She said she thought "who does this new guy think he is" and complained. When i mentioned all the male porn on her desk she said "i know, i'm an arsehole, sorry"

So if you want to put it that way i was singled out by a double standard of massive proportions: a witch hunt. A gulag of reverse sexism.

But at the end of the day did it really hurt me, deprive me of my equality, make me feel persecuted or vulnerable?

I just think that there's subtle underpinnings to the way people interact at work, and if you take it all too seriously then after six months you'll be travis bickle, waiting for the rain to come and wash all the scum off the streets. If i listened to the rubbish people talk in the workplace around me and took it seriously... whoa I'd probably wind up a tower with a gun on a sunny day, haha...

I agree that it's **** and at times it just bores the piss out of me but what are you gonna do? become your floor's sexual equality officer? get a whistle? issue tickets?

Comfort yourself with the - on average - 15% wage disparity between you and women, or the fact you don't have to shave your armpits, or whatever.

dr_manhattan

PS at the end of the day here's thought:

for every woman saying "all men are bastards" there's a man saying "ach all she needs is a good ride" - both are dumb, annoying and sexist.

But either people mean them as a joke, or they're not worth listening to.

Being stupid is an equal opportunities employer ;-)

Archeron

dr_manhattan wrote: »

I agree that it's **** and at times it just bores the piss out of me but what are you gonna do? become your floor's sexual equality officer? get a whistle? issue tickets?

Comfort yourself with the - on average - 15% wage disparity between you and women, or the fact you don't have to shave your armpits, or whatever.

A whistle eh?

Your post does make sense, and at the end of the day, it is workplace politics. I thought that I'd had good experience with this type of office crap though, as I've worked in companies with anywhere between only 4 and over 2000 employees, and I always got on with everybody. Now in this place, there is a particular group that just seem to defy all the laws of polite office behaviour that I learned over the years, and it does bug the bejaysus out of me. Not just with the politics sh*t, but with the whole attitiude of some women thinking they can say or do what they like simply because they ARE women.

I suppose its probably a draw down from management anyway, as the managment of this company (all men) are in their own way incredibly sexist, and incredibly racist (something else that shocks me when I hear customers described in very derogatory ways due to their background or origin). Perhaps the best thing to do would be to look at the whole environment around me and see if its a good idea to continue here. After all, I spend an average of 50-55 hours a week here, and Lord knows I dont want to end being assimilated by this lot.
For now though, I think I shall sit here and admire my 15% extra pay (not really true) and hairy armpits! (true).

dr_manhattan

Well that's the thing, isn't it?

And I have to say, I've been in jobs where the temptation is to start losing respect for women, because of the excrutiatingly petulant bull**** that some women spend all their time at. It's like working with the worst in spoiled children. Hell at the age of 26 I shared office space with a screaming fool of a woman who - finding her sexual advances toward a superior were met with on interest - actually just went ahead and told all her mates she'd slept with him.

Can you imagine - even at 26 - the kind of arrested development in that woman's head? How screwed up she must be?

The trick is, i find, to remember that male behaviour is not that visible to us men, cos we're just not used to it. Once you can open your eyes and see what complete turds most men behave like - especially in a group - then office life is free to make you hate everyone, not just women, lol.

And please, don't get me started on sexist, racist male cliques. I call it "the whiteboy club" - in otherwords, the things that white straight males will say to another white straight male, *assuming* that they want to hear about it and feel the same way.

Honestly, office life is just a one way trip to misanthropy. There is something deeply, deeply wrong about the whole setup. I recall vividly when i first saw "the office" and david brent, and thinking "at last! those freaks will have to see what they are like on tv! praise the lord!"

;-)

Bottle_of_Smoke

I get the impression a lot of women feel inferior to men. So that's why you can't say all women are bitches etc.

Men simply don't care about equality as much as women.

dr_manhattan

"Men simply don't care about equality as much as women."

Well, that can be easily explained: We have it. They don't.

That's why it's called "invisible privilege"

It's also why white people don't tend to care about race as much as non white people tend to... know what I mean?

Sleepy

Well, people aren't equal.

Would I be right in thinking that you're younger than these women? That you're in a career while they're in jobs and that you'll be passing them by?

In my opinion, the behaviour you're describing is typical of those women who feel bitter that they haven't been as successful as they expected to be in the new 'equal' workforce. Unfortunately what they seemed to have missed was the fact that you usually only progress in a career if you're actually good at what you do.

The main difference seems to be that a certain type of unsucessful women are rather more bitter than men about their lack of success.

Zombrex

Sleepy wrote: »

The main difference seems to be that a certain type of unsucessful women are rather more bitter than men about their lack of success.

Really? I've meet quite a few bitter older men in low level jobs.

I think people are falling into the same trap that we are complaining about these women of doing, that being turning this isn't a men vs women issue, when really it is an issue with ignorant bitter people vs who ever is around them that they can pick on

I've no idea if any these women are any more bitter because they are women than they would have been if they had been born men. TBH I don't think it really matters. They are bitter and aggressive, as all humans can be.

metrovelvet

Archeron wrote: »

When I do something wrong in work, I get fairly and reasonably bollicked. Fair enough. When a woman cocks up in work, it is explained to them gently what they done wrong, and how they can avoid doing that in the future. When I asked my boss why this is, he told me that the girls in the office are gentle little flowers (his words, used with a wry smile), and will not accept a bollicking like blokes would. As a result, to keep his own life more peaceful, and to avoid “you’re picking on me because I’m a girl, WAAAAAAHHH” type stand offs and cryathons, he just goes down the more peaceful path of least resistance.

.

You shouldnt be getting bollocked either. This reminds me of my high school when it just started allowing women in. When women were admotted the priests were still throwing the boys up against the wall and hitting them, but they werent doing this to the girls. Eventually someone said "hey wait a minute... thats not fair..." and they stopped hitting the boys. So it brought equality that benefited the men too. It would have been "equal" to hit the girls too, but hardly fair.

dr_manhattan

"I think people are falling into the same trap that we are complaining about these women of doing, that being turning this isn't a men vs women issue, when really it is an issue with ignorant bitter people vs who ever is around them that they can pick on"

best point yet made: however - though i agree 100% - it's very hard to get people to see this when they're stuck in a given situation. A lot of this is down to the social dynamic in the workplace.

Simply put, it's more fashionable and in some ways more acceptable for a woman to say "all men are bastards" than it is for a man to say "all women are bitches", right or wrong.

So therefore men - who imho are still way in the dominant position socially and in the workplace - still feel victimised because they are 'not allowed' to say what women say.

It's because our privilege in invisible to us, basically: like when white southerners say that affirmative action is "discriminating against them" - it's not, there's just a temporary double standard created by a changing social dynamic: get over it.

Treora

All people revert a little when they form any sort of cohesive group. And everyone will play their advantages. That said Ireland is the only matriarchal developed economy that I know, which brings buckets of rewards, but also has a drop side like your situation. I have worked in England, Germany and Italy in similar setting and it was quite different.

It will take time for the pendulum to settle on the whole gender/ethnicity bigotry idea unless a critical mass issue is hit (I expect secure earnings for divorce lawyers over the next five to twenty years). All that can be asked for is steady employment levels. Luckily you can take it as an opportunity if you can find the right angle.

dr_manhattan

"Ireland is the only matriarchal developed economy that I know"

not quite sure what you mean here: I actually don't see that many female bosses in ireland...

Treora

dr_manhattan wrote: »

"Ireland is the only matriarchal developed economy that I know"

not quite sure what you mean here: I actually don't see that many female bosses in ireland...

Ask a group of Irish girls/women how they would describe Irish men. Next ask Spanish, Polish, Italian and Chinese how they would describe of men of their own ethnicity and Irish men. This will be far more persuasive than any other argument. Flip the genders and the conversation goes from funny to hilarious.

dr_manhattan

"Ask a group of Irish girls/women how they would describe Irish men."

LOL and let's just say i didn't have time for a quick focus group...?

It's much easier if you just explain what you mean by 'matriarchal' - no? I was just trying to figure out what you meant...

Treora

I think its great, but objectively Ireland is politically directed by local issues - small women led groups fighting on single issues - or by big boy greed (low taxation, incentives for development). As opposed to France which is more balanced, everyone will strike together / liberty is an exposed breast and a substancial nuclear arsenal.

The vast majority of successful small business startups comes from women. The current 30-something professionals are 65/35 female/male. This includes lawyers, accountants, doctors... There is positive discrimination in public appointment. And the constitution places women in a protected position while the legislation reaffirms their equal status. Public life has seen massive % changes in female assertion of civil power.

Ireland has always had a strong female aspect. The Irish mammy, more people revered the mother of Jesus than prayed to him directly. Other societies had strong women, but also strong men. Ireland did have some, but many of them came from a protestant background. It largely came about because stronger willed men were more likely to emigrate in recessions then women, who would rear her children in the home of her parents while her partner would send remittances.

Irish matrocracy will be a more obvious force in the future rather than its indirect influence in the past. This is a economic advantage that Ireland can capitalise upon as other powerful countries gain female leaders those leaders will examplify Ireland to their female electorate and build friendly trade links off the back occasions such as international womens day. Ireland will need a new strut to replace construction and the international womens lobby could be it.

Apologies for the tangential monologue, but it answers your question.

dr_manhattan

Well tbh that was what I thought you meant and I respectfully disagree.

The "professional workforce" is 65% female, 35% male? where do you get this from?

"The vast majority of successful small business startups comes from women"

again, please qualify vast majority, and where these stats come from? I work with a hell of a lot of startups and SMEs and meet very few women on a day to day basis...

Underlying all of this is reproductive rights being withheld, and the usual pay disparity, are you ignoring these or saying they don't exist...?

Either way, I think your terms "matriarchy" and "matrocracy" are hilariously overreaching... I mean really, hoe can you call any country with such a low rate of rape prosecution/conviction a "matriarchy", let alone one where abortion is illegal?

Also, drawing back to your previous cryptic answers:

"Ask a group of Irish girls/women how they would describe Irish men. Next ask Spanish, Polish, Italian and Chinese how they would describe of men of their own ethnicity and Irish men."

what do you feel would have been the response that would have explained to me what you meant?

All the rich couples I know are - to be quite frank - based on his wealth, not hers. There are certain day-to-day facts that prevent me ever describing Ireland as "equal" let alone "matriarchal"

While I'll respect any argument saying "things have changed" I think that the terms "matriarchy" and "matrocracy" (hell, how many female TDs, judges...?) are way overstretched.

And btw if Ireland *is* a matriarchy then the women described by the OP are nothing but ignorant, bullying, mannerless, chauvinist pigs, talking in the presence of a male, second class peon.... but I don't think this is the case...

Next you'll be telling me that liz mcmanus and mary harney constitute "the government"...?

dr_manhattan

PS

"Ireland has always had a strong female aspect. The Irish mammy, more people revered the mother of Jesus than prayed to him directly."

So now the subjugation of the irish woman into a caring role, and the misogynist notion of "the virgin mother" are tokens of female liberation? What next, the catholic church is a matriarchy?

You don't think every other culture has strong mammy figures? Why do nyou have to borrow a term (mammy) used for african slave matriarchs, if the irish mammy is such a potent female figure?

Is "juno and the paycock" a play about how women control irish society then? Or is it a play about how they pick up all its abuse and responsibility, while the men spend the money?

Sure: and in Hong Kong they're a "matriarchy", too - naked women dance on tables, everyone pays them maximum attention, even gives them money. Half the town is devoted to this "worship" of the female body.

Beauty pageants and wet tshirt contests... all "matriarchal"

...?

Treora

dr_manhattan wrote: »

PS

Beauty pageants and wet tshirt contests... all "matriarchal"

...?

Ouch, touchy. No one is trying to convince you, perhaps looking up a dictionary will help though. I have lived in 6 countries and love objectively watching people struggle for power in every social situation. And gender across ethnicities is a favorite. Try out the suggestion I made previously when you head out tonight and step back for the results. Also ask some baby boomer women too.

johnnyskeleton

dr_manhattan wrote: »

hoe can you call any country with such a low rate of rape prosecution/conviction a "matriarchy", let alone one where abortion is illegal?

While I agree with the majority of your criticisms of Treora's analysis (which, without statistics remain doubtful), don't suggest that a low rate of rape prosecution/conviction is patriarchal or somehow an abuse of women's rights.

Men can be raped too, women can rape (well, s4 rape & serious sexual assault anyways). Women can sit on juries, and it is juries that convict. The attitude of the DPP seems to be that if there is any realistic possibility of a conviction, he will prosecute. Beyond all the hype, it may well be female jurors who decide to acquit on the basis that they simply don't believe the complainant.

As for abortion, again this is not a woman's issue like some people would like to make it out, but a societal issue. The old line that a woman should be free to do what she likes with her body is frankly ignoring the issue.

______________________________

Back to the OP, on a practical level I would suggest the following:

1) Buy an ipod and put it on whenever their conversation becomes offensive or distracting
2) Argue the side of the allegedly bastard men in their lives and try to bring reason to the discussion (without, of course, reverting to any insults to women)
3) You could make a sexual harrasment complaint, but the problem here will always be that the injury to your sexuality caused by their talk will never be as bad as the shame of making a complaint about it (or so the male mind will usually think), so instead, try to shift the conversation or let it be known in fun casual terms that you don't like to hear them talking about men in that way.

dr_manhattan

"Ouch, touchy. No one is trying to convince you, perhaps looking up a dictionary will help though."

Treora, you are the definition of 'high maintenance', lol. Perhaps, if you wish to make a point then you could supply:

1. the word being defined
2. the definition you agree with

I'm assuming you mean "matriarchy", in which case i'd suggest that you... you know... say what you mean.

"I have lived in 6 countries and love objectively watching people struggle for power in every social situation."

okay, now you've gone from wierdly oblivious to just plain creepy in my estimation. You love "objectively" watching people struggle? Creepy. I'm not sure how objective you can be about the denial of basic human rights to anyone... but yeah, creepy.

I've lived in a bunch of countries too... and you know what I hate? People being told that they're free when they're not.

"Beyond all the hype, it may well be female jurors who decide to acquit on the basis that they simply don't believe the complainant."

Hmm... while I agree with your criticism of my criticism... I still see this as a "womens' rights" issue. I know this is a gross oversimplification, but I still see it that way, Let's just say In have a big chip on my shoulder and that's the way I see it, for reasons of pragmatism, for reasons of common sense... for the usual reasons.

However, I'm delighted to see the subject being properly scrutinised, and I can't say you're wrong... I just very basically disagree...

am I being vague?

johnnyskeleton

dr_manhattan wrote: »

Hmm... while I agree with your criticism of my criticism... I still see this as a "womens' rights" issue. I know this is a gross oversimplification, but I still see it that way, Let's just say In have a big chip on my shoulder and that's the way I see it, for reasons of pragmatism, for reasons of common sense... for the usual reasons.

However, I'm delighted to see the subject being properly scrutinised, and I can't say you're wrong... I just very basically disagree...

am I being vague?

I'll gladly thrash this out in another thread if you like, but I believe it is very dangerous to politicise rape trials, and even more dangerous to make it a gender issue. A criminal trial is the best means we have of finding the truth, and I think the system we have at the moment is very fair. If you extend the logic that it is a womens' rights issue to its logical conclusion, every person acquitted of rape is a failure to vindicate those rights and not a true finding of fact by the jury.

Treora

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

don't suggest that a low rate of rape prosecution/conviction is patriarchal or somehow an abuse of women's rights.

Individual abhorrent behaviour does not define the power structure or values of a nation. On the statistical side, from all the requests to check for a date-rape drug (since 1990 in Ireland), and there have been several hundred, there has been a confirmed grand total of zero positive results (garda press office). Yes these womens claims were real, but also there willingness and strength of character to request the check is testament to their values. In so many other countries women as made fearful of reporting these acts or believe that male dominated structures will ignore their claims. This includes countries like Germany and Spain [you can include most of South America, Asia, Africa, over 50% of Europe and North America in this]. Ireland is more matriarchal than these countries, please name a developed country that is more matriarchal than Ireland.

dr_manhattan

"Individual abhorrent behaviour does not define the power structure or values of a nation."

Rape and sexual assault are not 'individual' they are collective, large scale social trends, and to try to push them under the carpet as "not part of" gender politics is - imho - like people in the 80s who would ignore paramilitary activity and intimidation in the north, and pretend that people had equal rights when in fact - due to extra-legal activities on both sides - they were not in the least bit equal or free.

There are sexual assaults every day in this and any other country, western or otherwise. We know this and we know the way they work.

These are violent crimes, and are generally committed with the intention of teaching the victim a lesson or 'taking her down a peg or two" - rape is not generally a sexual crime, it is a crime of physical power and authority, and thus it is stupidly naive imho to try and say it is not a political act.

If a woman cannot dress as she pleases, behave as she pleases and go wherever she pleases - which she cannot, in any modern society, without having to think of "the consequences" - rape and sexual assault - then she does not have equal rights with the men - the very same men that *make* it dangerous for her top behave however she pleases.

So if this is not a political issue - if this is about "individual, abhorrent" acts, then why are the sexual assault stats so horrendously consistent, year in, year out. If this is not in fact a constant stream of violent acts which collectively intimidate and control the behaviour of women, then what is, please?

If it is "not political" to wish to be able to do as you please, then what *is* political?

And if "individual, abhorrent" acts are not political, then surely every bomb in the north of ireland, every policeman who shot-to-kill, even the actions of the SAS in Gibraltar or the kneecapping of children for miscellaneous opublic order offences: these are not political either, so there was never a problem in the north, there's no problem in former yugoslavia, and Israel is a paradise that just happens to have a huge wall down the middle of it...

I'm honestly quite shocked at this attitude, and I'd like to know what sexual assault is, if it's not political: is it just an inconvenient fact of life for women? Cos if that's what you're saying, then that's the most opppressive attitude to women I've ever heard.

dr_manhattan

Oh and PS 'treora':

"Ireland is more matriarchal than these countries, please name a developed country that is more matriarchal than Ireland."

1. I have already asked you to define 'matriarchal' and to give me a source for the 65% female ownership of business you mentioned earlier: you answer my questions, I'll answer yours. Whole list of things I asked you. Check back.

2. Repeating the term "matriarchal" again and again doesn't make your point any truer or clearer. Women do not rule this country, the idea is absurd when abortion is illegal, and the conviction rate for rape so low: this means that the "rulers" of this country actually have to be afraid when walking the streets, and cannot control their right to reproductive control. That's not "matriarchy" by a long shot, and trying to pretend it is is just stupid.

3. You say woman rule ireland: I say women power share with a subordinate role. Just because other countries treat women like worse **** than we do, doesn't mean they "rule" here. You think the X case could have happened in a "matrarchy"? You think the "right to travel" is an issue when womne are in control?

Treora

dr_manhattan wrote: »

1. I have already asked you to define 'matriarchal' and to give me a source for the 65% female ownership of business you mentioned earlier

As I said, look up a dictionary. Companies registration office, small business criteria.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

2. Women do not rule this country, the idea is absurd when abortion is illegal, and the conviction rate for rape so low: this means that the "rulers" of this country actually have to be afraid when walking the streets, and cannot control their right to reproductive control. That's not "matriarchy" by a long shot, and trying to pretend it is is just stupid.

Women can rule and abortion be illegal at the same time. Other women just have differing priorities to you. There are statistically more women then men in this democracy. If women wanted something collectively then they have a greater lobby and vote than men and greater organisational groupings then men. Heck retired women in nursing homes could probably change the legislation if they wanted - such are their numbers. Women are equally, if not more, prevalent in the professional organisations, the GAA and political parties as men (just not as common in publicly elected roles), they have organisations like Network Ireland and NWCI which are gender exclusive and have no corresponding organisation for men. Thus the power networks exist. I hope you believe that we live in state that practices some form of democracy. Women as a gender have a far greater lobby than men.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

3. You say woman rule ireland

Never said that, I just said that it is matriarchal. Cultural values and direct power are different.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

3. I say women power share with a subordinate role. Just because other countries treat women like worse **** than we do, doesn't mean they "rule" here. You think the X case could have happened in a "matrarchy"? You think the "right to travel" is an issue when womne are in control?

Show me your proof. Relatively we are matriarchal and at the top of that relative field. Thus Ireland is the most matriarchal developed country in the world.

Many women hold opposing views to you and have power. Most men are too apathic to want to "rule" women or vote against progressive female self control, whereas many women argue against each others values or views on the best way to achieve common goals for women. Yes some men do want to control, but they are usually too focused on property prices to care one way or the other on many issues that you would fight tooth and nail over.

The men in power don't want change the legislation governing the X case, not because they want to stop it, but because they a) want to put legisation that line the pockets of their mates first or b) don't want to rock the boat. If someone rocked the boat for them, they would call a referendum in a heartbeat if they thought it could secure them the female vote come next election.

It is like atheism in USA politics. Most politicans privately think most people are mad on religion, but they have to back some horse or they will rock the boat too much and not get elected.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

"Ireland is more matriarchal than these countries, please name a developed country that is more matriarchal than Ireland."

So what is the answer to my question?

P.S. Rarely, if ever, is a individual sexual assault a political act (mass war rape being the main exception. Individual assault is a personal power play, like consentual sexual acts whether they be sharing, teasing/testing, surrendering or the taking of power.

dr_manhattan

*sigh*

"ma·tri·ar·chy [mey-tree-ahr-kee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -chies.
1. a family, society, community, or state governed by women.
2. a form of social organization in which the mother is head of the family, and in which descent is reckoned in the female line, the children belonging to the mother's clan; matriarchal system."

so therefore, by your own criteria:

"Women are equally, if not more, prevalent in the professional organisations, the GAA and political parties as men (just not as common in publicly elected roles), they have organisations like Network Ireland and NWCI which are gender exclusive and have no corresponding organisation for men."

this is NOT a matriarchy. 'kay?

Just stop using that word, cos Ireland is no more a matriarchy than it is a monarchy. Women in business is not matriarchy, nor is a majority of women a matriarchy.

"P.S. Rarely, if ever, is a individual sexual assault a political act"

Don't twist things here:

The system of justice for individual sexual assaults is part of a political system. The motivation behind the act itself is irrelevant when the state does not protect women: the fact is that they are not protected from those who would use their sex and sexuality to degrade them.

Just like in the deep south, burning a cross is not a "political act" per se: it's a personal act of violent intimidation.

But refusing to punish cross burners is a *very* political act.

And btw, I know of not a *single* nation in the world that even comes close to justifying the description of "matriarchal", less or more - women neither rule nor control nor are they heads of families. And as strong as many working class "mammies" the world over may be, they are not "in control" so spare me.

Hell, even Judaism isn't purely matrilineal anymore.

Lots of people have strong lobbies and exclusive groups: are you gonna tell me now that the NAACP "controls" america? Or the associations of irish immigrants? There's lots of them, too, yet no organisation protecting the rights of WASP captains of industry... does that mean they rule the roost?

What disturbs me about this is that it's part of a brainwashing process that gives tiny pieces of control to women and then just keeps telling them it's full control. It's patriarchal, patronising, untrue and dangerous.

Treora

dr_manhattan wrote: »

*sigh*

"ma·tri·ar·chy [mey-tree-ahr-kee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -chies.
1. a family, society, community, or state governed by women.
2. a form of social organization in which the mother is head of the family, and in which descent is reckoned in the female line, the children belonging to the mother's clan; matriarchal system."

The highest office is held by a woman, and most community politics are dominated by female lobby groups or female led groups. Irish society revers women and mothers more so than all other developed nations and there is no counter balance.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

so therefore, by your own criteria:

I didn't set any criteria.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

"Women are equally, if not more, prevalent in the professional organisations, the GAA and political parties as men (just not as common in publicly elected roles), they have organisations like Network Ireland and NWCI which are gender exclusive and have no corresponding organisation for men."

this is NOT a matriarchy. 'kay?

This being a democracy means that it fulfills part one of the definition you used above. Can you reference where you got that definition, it's a little weak.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

Just stop using that word, cos Ireland is no more a matriarchy than it is a monarchy. Women in business is not matriarchy, nor is a majority of women a matriarchy.

No & majority rules in a democracy, so yes Ireland is a matriarchal.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

Don't twist things here:

I'm not, you're just falling over you're own argument.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

The system of justice for individual sexual assaults is part of a political system.

Please re-read my post on distinguishing the difference between individual acts and group/political acts.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

The motivation behind the act itself is irrelevant when the state does not protect women

Ya, what now. Motivation is the source for all things. We were taking hormones here.

Please research the etimology of the word "mammy". Mammy was first used 600< years ago, mater 2600> years ago.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

And as strong as many working class the world over may be, they are not "in control" so spare me.

Perhaps you are drawing a parallel between working class and matriarchal where none exist.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

Hell, even Judaism isn't purely matrilineal anymore.

Matilineal geneology was used as a way of protecting dowry and shows that judaism was never matriarchal.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

Lots of people have strong lobbies and exclusive groups: are you gonna tell me now that the NAACP "controls" america?

No, but you should look into the fact that there are less than 7 million jews in the USA and Israel receives over 8 billion dollars a year from the USA.:p

dr_manhattan wrote: »

yet no organisation protecting the rights of WASP captains of industry... does that mean they rule the roost?

You don't know of IBEC, do you.

dr_manhattan wrote: »

What disturbs me about this is that it's part of a brainwashing process that gives tiny pieces of control to women and then just keeps telling them it's full control. It's patriarchal, patronising, untrue and dangerous.

What disturbs you is that this view is rarely expressed because no man would dare discuss this in public for fear of reprisal, from women. This means that men fear discussing what they see as the truth. Curtailing the expression of opinion and ideas is dangerous.

Look, just because not every women is in control doesn't preclude Ireland from being a matriarchal society.

And you never answered my question.

Oh, and if you dare to ask non-Irish women for their opinions on your next night out. Just throw out the question and let them shock you before you defend what you might percieve as an attack on Irish women.

dr_manhattan

"What disturbs you is that this view is rarely expressed because no man would dare discuss this in public for fear of reprisal, from women."

sorry but this is a perfect example of why it's frustrating arguing with you:

You're telling me what I think, why "men" do things, and what way that works socially... so what's the point? You obviously know everything. Even why I think things and what I'm doing (see below) in "defending women"

Buut anyways:

"The highest office is held by a woman"

Perhaps the fact that a woman occupies the figurehead post of president with no power whatsoever yet you call it "the highest post" might give you a clue as to how fake this "matriarchy" you insist exists, exists.

Funny not many of the major CEOs or TDs are women are they? Or indeed the taoiseach? Was the UK a "matriarchy" in the 80s? No it was a patriarchy ruled by a woman.

"Can you reference where you got that definition, it's a little weak."

dictionary.com, I've been asking you for your defintion for five posts now and you keep telling me to "go look it up" and "ask people about it"- see how it's frustrating talking to you?

"No & majority rules in a democracy, so yes Ireland is a matriarchal."

That's quite simply rubbish: If the majority of Ireland's population were kings, it wouldn't make it a monarchy: again, you misunderstand the term "matriarchy" and are carrying on as if your definition - which you refuse to give - is the case. It's not.

A matriarchy is entirely controlled by women. Ireland isn't even close. The aboriginal society in Cuba, for example, was matriarchal. We are not. We are another postcolonial democracy.

"Please research the etimology of the word "mammy". Mammy was first used 600< years ago, mater 2600> years ago."

Sorry but you used the term "irish mammy" not me... And wtf does the word 'mater' have to do with it? 'matriarch' is not the same word as 'mater', their respective etymologies are different because they are different words, even if one may be derived from the other.

"Perhaps you are drawing a parallel between working class and matriarchal where none exist."

Oh for god's sake: I'm drawing a parallel between "irish mammy", which you used, and working class: "irish mammies" were not aristocracy, agreed? Nor were they matriarchs as they didn't even have the vote. Nor were african american "mammies".

"Oh, and if you dare to ask non-Irish women for their opinions on your next night out. Just throw out the question and let them shock you before you defend what you might percieve as an attack on Irish women."

I don't percieve any "attack" on anyone: I just think you're very mistaken in your beliefs, and I've got nothing better to do than construct counterarguments cos I've got a broken arm and am laid up for the duration.

I don't think women are close to equal in this country or anywhere else, and I think your use of the term matriarchy is simply incorrect. I am argusing on that side, you on the other. Okay? No attack or defence. I'm not some dumb liberal male who thinks women need "defending" I am stating *my* opinion and that is that women do not receive parity of treatment.

Your tendency to assume is annoying.

And as to your last statement:

1. why would I need to "go out in dublin" to meet or get the opinions of "foreign women"? tbh I'm not that impressed by the grasp of politics and current events held by most women I meet when I'm "out in dublin"

2. why would "foreign women" have any real understanding about the level of true power women have in a country they don't really know that well? From being told by their friends and colleagues?

3. why would a conversation with an irish woman be more appropriate? Do you ask Irish women when you want to know how much power italian women have?

I ask the above because plenty of irish and non irish professional women have talked to me recently about how they see women in "the british isles" every day talking about "empowerment" and their net worth, but spending all their real effort cowtowing to men and searching for a wealthy partner.

Many women have spoken to me about their fear that a glass ceiling of body image and collective insecurity is rolling back every inch of progress that feminists made in the 20th century. The upcoming generations, they say, are much worse.

Ands though I don't 100% agree with them, they have a BIG point.

" if you dare to ask "

Really, you should read what you post sometime, it's funny.

dr_manhattan

Oh and btw, just to give an example of some of the tangents...

"You don't know of IBEC, do you."

I remember them all the way back to when they were the FUE. I know more about them than most: but wtf does that have to do with proving ireland is a matriarchy?

My point was that there is no lobby group for WASP businessmen *in america* because my prior example was *in america* and WASP is and *american* term.

And the point of pointing that out was to show that *the dominant caste* in a society - in this case, WASP males - do not need advocacy groups or lobby organisations because they are the dominant caste.

That is why the amount of womens' business networking and lobby groups in ireland is not a representation ofn their powerbase, it is a representation of how much work they need to do in order to be treated equally in the workplace.

...and that is why I haven't responded to other, completely tangental, parts of your post. Cos it's really boring repeating myself again and again when you still won't even define the word you introduced to the discussion.

Nightwish

Before last year I had never worked in an office environment with so many people. In my previous job I was in an office on my own, and most of the people I was in contact with during the day were guys, so to say I got a bit of a shock working with 15 women would be an understatement. I totally see the OP's point. When someone comes in with pictures of their new neice/nephew/friends kid I keep working while the other 15 will fawn and drool over baby pictures for half an hour. I hate that kind of stuff. The chat in the office is enough to make your brain melt. I'm convinced I'm dumber now than I was before I started the job as all the talk revolves around diets/food/more food/more diets/weight/celebrities/their kids.
What annoys me most is the amount of slack I have to pick up because of the amount that take parental leave or only work 2 days a week. I know they're legally entitled to take the time off but I have to do so much more because certain people dont complete their work on time due to leaving at 2 on the dot every day.

dr_manhattan

I'm not sure if that is a problem with women in the workplace, or simply parents (I've never been able to work out if that stuff with parents is just me - I mean, I am cantankerous - or if they are in fact just lazy selfish bastards lol)

I do sympathise though: I mean, I fully realise that the concerns of us lesser, non-breeding humans are infinitesimally dull to these enlightened parents, but it would be nice to spare the chatter and constant photograph exchanges, reports of farts and dribbles, and goo-goo, gaa-gaaing.

In fact, a large, stalinist poster with a picture of a baby on it and "THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME: GET BACK TO WORK" might just cover it all, haha.

But like I say, I think that's more a "parents in general" than necessarily a women's work issue, no?

Nightwish

Well its predominantly a womans issue, as I had worked with a good few guys in my previous job, none of them took parental leave.
Imagine an office where all the guys stood at a computer an watched a soccer match online, the women would go mental. Its just the same as them cooing over kids/wedding dresses etc

dr_manhattan

"Well its predominantly a womans issue, as I had worked with a good few guys in my previous job, none of them took parental leave."

Hm, in my experience it's 70-30 as regards parental leave (as in, women would take 70% of the leave) but it's kinda 60-40 or 50-50 for the infinite and neverending baby discussions.

It's just babies, babies, ****ing babies: sometimes friends of co-workers drop in on a friday afternoon because they're passing with their baby.

It kinda gets worse than that, as I've also had to share space with an insecure engaged woman who constantly spouted vitriol about how all men still single at thirty were date rapist sociopaths, that they should have found someone by now, yadayada... just hardcore anti male propaganda, 24/7.

I could tell quite a few stories illustrating many of the... less stable aspects of 30something female singles, but if I did I imagine I'd get cautioned about it.

anyways, bitching over...

WindSock

It is probably something to do with how our brains are wired from Thousands of years sittting around and chatting while we worked in a big group together doing menial and unexciting jobs. I'd have prefered to go off on a hunt, myself. Tapping away on a computer is not very different to sorting red berries from purple ones.

WindSock

Archeron wrote: »

, just this morning one of them had a row with her other half on the phone. She and 5 others, that’s not a typo either, 5 others making a total of 6 women including the cryer, ran off the toilet to comfort each other and tell her how her boyfriends a bastard. They remained in there for over an hour while everybody else was up to their eyes in work.

That's really not on and I would complain about it if I were you.

When I do something wrong in work, I get fairly and reasonably bollicked. Fair enough. When a woman cocks up in work, it is explained to them gently what they done wrong, and how they can avoid doing that in the future. When I asked my boss why this is, he told me that the girls in the office are gentle little flowers (his words, used with a wry smile), and will not accept a bollicking like blokes would. As a result, to keep his own life more peaceful, and to avoid “you’re picking on me because I’m a girl, WAAAAAAHHH” type stand offs and cryathons, he just goes down the more peaceful path of least resistance.

That is an extremely condescending attitude of a boss to have of his employees. If I was working there, I would be offended that I would not get reprimanded 'because I am a woman and couldn't take it'

It may sound funny to some of you that I would ask to be punished, but to ask to be treated fairly, you have to expect to be punished fairly too. It does us no good to 'pick and choose' what aspects of fair treatment we would like, it's all our nothing.

Very unprofessional of him, I would report it to HR.

dr_manhattan

"It may sound funny to some of you that I would ask to be punished"

LOL, naw, I'm sure there's a forum for it in here ;-) sorry, couldn't resist.

To be fair, I have worked withy women in the past who display the same commendable attitude as yourself, and have sorted this kind of silliness out - problem is, in the quagmire of office sexual politics, it's only a woman who can sort this out.

If it's a bloke it just gets deflected as either abuse or incomprehensible.

Hell, I once was in charge of a girl who wouldn't do her job: not couldn't, actually wouldn't.

Thank god i recorded times and tasks, but because her daddy was connected higher up in the company, I did nothing. Eventually I just cut her out of the work roster, cos she was eating everyone's time and just not getting the simplest of tasks done. I spoke with my next higher up and explained this.

So she started coming in at 11 and leaving at 4... no problem.

Then she took on a nixer, which puzzled us all, cos she didn't have the skills to start the job, let alone finish it. So she started asking my team to help her, when i was away. Being polite, they did.

When I found out about this I gave her a bollicking - stupidly, in front of them. Simply saying that if work was being done in the studio, it went through me and it got paid for...

She complained to HR and said that I had "created an atmosphere of harassment on the job" and that "even the women were complicit in it, to toe the line with me"

HR were pretty alarmed until the nixer came up. That was pretty funny, they were like, "sorry, an outside job on our equipment?" - she actually didn't know it was a problem.

Then I produced - and spent a full day going through - the lists of incomplete jobs and unfinished work, and her arrival and departure times. I got a full apology and she got... moved to another department!!! Who came to me two weeks later to ask if I'd had any trouble....!!!

Now I am not trying to say this is a womens' issue - there are many incompetent, annoying, daddy's *boys* in the workplace too... I'm just trying to illustrate how it can be scary to bollick a woman in the workplace. If I'd been more lax in my records, i'd have been done for harassment.

The irony being that all I did was cut a huge hole in my schedules to allow her to earn a salary for doing nothing, 11-4. In return she deliberately tried to take my job.

Hell, what's wrong with people? free money?

DeVore

Dr_manhattan, I think you should know, I have stopped reading your posts as you seem incapable of learning about the

tag or to use the multi quote system. Apologies if I am repeating anything you have said above.

I have posted before that "feminists" arent interested in equalising anything. Equality is a mathematical concept where both sides of the equation are balanced. Feminst on the other hand are simply interested in loading up extras on one side of the equation. Thats ok, thats why they arent called "equalists", they are interested in improving the lot of women (and there is a lot that needs fixing to be fair).

To address the points above, wouldnt it be better management if no one got bollocked in work?

As for women in your office bitching about men? Yes, some women do it. I've worked with them too in my time. I've also worked for and with women who didnt. And the same for men... some were pigs and some were brilliant.

Watch any advertisment on tv at the moment and reverse the gender and see if it would be accepted. Men are often portrayed as idiots who can't make the washing machine "go".

DeV.

dr_manhattan

reading this or not, DeVore:

"Thats ok, thats why they arent called "equalists", they are interested in improving the lot of women (and there is a lot that needs fixing to be fair)."

Your logic is flawed.

You admit women are subjugated, yet you say that being pro-women has nothing to do with equality?

Well in which case, a man who does *nothing* about it - given he is an accessory to an unfair society as you admit - is by definition anti women.

Your being ridiculously literal: that's like saying anyone who fights for black peoples' rights has nothing to do with equality: you're just being pedantic, you have no information by which to judge.