Men-bashing letter in Irish Examiner

iptba

I'm afraid I find the tone of this letter a bit annoying/makes me feel uncomfortable:

Men only

Saturday, April 10, 2010

ISN’T it interesting that in addition to being the ones who caused the banking crisis, men are the only ones commenting on it and its solutions?

Rarely, if ever, does one see a woman on current affairs panels when NAMA is being discussed. The duality of patriarchy is such that only men can provide the solutions to the problems they cause in the first place.

Maynooth
Co Kildare

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/letters/men-only-116818.html

I don't think if a letter spoke about women in such a contemptuous tone it would be published.

Reminds me of Germany in the early part of the century when it had financial problems and fingers were pointed at the Jews. (I'm not a historian just going on impressions from a bit of history I picked up)

krudler

Saturday, April 10, 2010

ISN’T it interesting that in addition to being the ones who caused the banking crisis, men are the only ones commenting on it and its solutions?

Rarely, if ever, does one see a woman on current affairs panels when NAMA is being discussed. The duality of patriarchy is such that only men can provide the solutions to the problems they cause in the first place.

Maynooth
Co Kildare

Yup, sure isnt it a man running our healthcare service?

oh no wait...

CDfm

Tsk tsk

Anne Heraty who has Guided CPL to market domination in Irish recruitment is a woman but when she appoints non execs to CPL they are all men ( and one named Breffni),

http://www.cpl.ie/Investor_Relations/board_of_directors.asp

Now she has had some non exec positions herself - Anglo Irish ring any bells - so yes one can say she already has contributed to NAMA. Is she still on the board of the Irish Stock Exchange.

So really -does the appointment of women make a difference and when in the position do women appoint other women????

There are women leaders in business and here are where they hang out

http://www.businessandleadership.com/special-reports/report/top-50-women-in-business/3

Are they a "I didnt get where I am today by appointing women brigade"

So where do women pop up careerwise if not in business -there is nothing stopping them and do women invest and put risk capital into business???

Not really -women tend not to be entrepeneurs - this is probably the basic reason they dont get there. But when they do -they are in with the same chance as anyone else..........

EDIT -what a lazy patronising letter

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

So really -does the appointment of women make a difference and when in the position do women appoint other women????

I doubt it because it's more about the system and the women who make it to the top are just as moulded by it as the men who make it are.

Pherekydes

That opinion is simply wrong. Joan Burton will give her two cents to anyone and everyone.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

I doubt it because it's more about the system and the women who make it to the top are just as moulded by it as the men who make it are.

The letter demands a reply for laziness and absurd abuse of the word patriarchy - which with societal should be banned.

It smacks of a second hand book shop sociology beginners handbook.

I think it demands a campaign against it and iptba should write a stern letter to the editor deploring its use as a catchphrase.

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

It smacks of a second hand book shop sociology beginners handbook.

I think it demands a campaign against it and iptba should write a stern letter to the editor deploring its use as a catchphrase.

You're hilarious CDfm

Slight tangent but I heard on a podcast the other day that 'fascism' is the most wrongly-used word in the English language today.

Given that patriarchy refers to a system in which men dominate, I'm not sure it's necessarily a misuse of the word as men do indeed dominate the business and political world in Ireland.

CDfm

My dear tacconal one must look at family law in Ireland and conclude that it in fact a matriarchy by any stetch of the imagination. Women now dominate teaching to keep it so

And women dominate teaching and family property

matriarchy noun

/ˈmeɪ.tri.ɑː.ki//-ɑːr-/ n [C or U]
</H1>a type of society in which women have most of the authority and power, or a society in which property belongs to women and is given to children by women rather than men

Even the new Civil Partnership Bill is matriarchal - the only reason that the Irish Parliment have problems with Gay Marriage is that they have a problem with the concept of giving family property to a man.

I mean how else can you explain the bill

Cowan " Right lads -we are going to have a gay marriage law"

Gormley " Well boss what women will get the property"

Cowan " Agreed - gay marriage and give women who are not married the property of men they are not married to"

Gormley " Now I know why Im not Taoiseach and you are -pure genius "

Cowan " Its simple anyone complains about gay marriage and we will call them a patriarchal misogynist"

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

My dear tacconal one must look at family law in Ireland and conclude that it in fact a matriarchy by any stetch of the imagination. Women now dominate teaching to keep it so

And women dominate teaching and family property

No, you misunderstand what I mean - or perhaps I wasn't clear.

The worlds of politics and business are patriarchal. The home is indeed dominated by women. It would appear we haven't moved very far from the old dynamic of:
men - public sphere
women - private sphere.

Each sex holds an unfair balance of power in its respective sphere and suffers discrimination when stepping into the other sphere. This discrimination can be merely social attitudes, comments going right up to legal and institutional structures that create barriers).

Your analysis of the Civil Marriage Bill is a little off-the wall...

CDfm

Really Taconnal

The world of homelessness is dominated by men 85% women 15%

Public Sphere Men 85% Women 15%
Private Sphere Women 85% Men 15%

The world of entrepeneurship ie putting your own money into a business is dominated by men and I think the ratio is 2.5 to 1

So public sphere vs private sphere - women dont bet on business so when it comes to leading it they are not in it because they havent joined in the first place. Men are homeless because public policy allows it.

My analysis is closer than you think.

metrovelvet

I think you should specify "Irish women" and not make sweeping statements about half of the worlds population. If half the population hadnt been trapped in kitchens for the past several ceturies who knows what the world would be like now.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

I think you should specify "Irish women" and not make sweeping statements about half of the worlds population. If half the population hadnt been trapped in kitchens for the past several ceturies who knows what the world would be like now.

That is cold comfort to the men who dont have a kitchen to be trapped in.

And what do past centuries to do with it Irishmen didnt have the vote till 1918 women in 1921 and women and men both worked potato patches and died in the Great Famine.

A Woman was Queen of England for most of the 19th Century presiding over it and a woman has been Queen of the UK for nearly 60 years now.

So you are arguing what happened in the upper classes to people whose ancestors were peasants.

If you read the article I linked it to and where women are in 30% of the companies and sucessful -you might cotton on that I am pro-diversity.

http://www.businessandleadership.com/special-reports/report/top-50-women-in-business/3

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

The world of entrepeneurship ie putting your own money into a business is dominated by men and I think the ratio is 2.5 to 1

So public sphere vs private sphere - women dont bet on business so when it comes to leading it they are not in it because they havent joined in the first place. Men are homeless because public policy allows it.

And you think that there are no women supporting many of these men that start their own businesses?

As for homelessness, it would be worth reading into the causes of homelessness and then the reasons why people stay homeless.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

And you think that there are no women supporting many of these men that start their own businesses?

maybe or maybe not - but in the stats somewhere there up to 30% of director roles are held by women and i would say thats in proportion to their participation.

I am just putting down a simple hypotheses as when terms such as patriarchal are used it implies a deliberate plan.

So while womens situations are improving to the extent that we almost have equal numbers of GPs etc by 2040 male primary teachers will be a thing of the past.

So I imagine women have caught up already -its just not reflected in the senior positions yetband thats an age demographic

As for homelessness, it would be worth reading into the causes of homelessness and then the reasons why people stay homeless.

I imagine that a great deal has to do with the fact that the services put women, children,the elderly, and everyone else first.

Men are just not classed as vulnerable which may account for the high suicide rate and premature deaths among men.

So the Titanic factor of Women and Children first may keep the men at the back of the queue.

Its the Catch 22 of Social Policy where young men and those under 45 are now the most socially underpriveledged members of our society.


Why men dont get out of it is simply that it is not public policy to assist men-in the same way others that find themselves in that situation get helped. So they are "structurally" excluded by the system and become a self fulfilling prophesy.

Its not that women dont encounter the same problems and the same causes -its when they do they get assistance. So the problem is -this is how we help women and we should help men in the same way.

So the cause is lack of help.

hightower1

Bottom line is that letter is blatant sexism and should not have been printed, rest assured if it was sexism directed towards women it would not have been.
Typical ... sexism in the media is ok once its pointed at men. You can make men out to be thick in ANYTHING sure its ok, adverts are a prime example of this type of tripe.

CDfm

its easy to go back and argue along the same lines - its harder to have constructive debate.

i dont think the majority of women are against listening but just dont like being preached at

when they see the facts they are mothers sisters aunts and grannies and go" hey -that could happen to my guy".

SugarHigh

iptba wrote: »

Reminds me of Germany in the early part of the century when it had financial problems and fingers were pointed at the Jews. (I'm not a historian just going on impressions from a bit of history I picked up)

Were in the 21st century now. It just highlights how long you probably have been making ridiculous comparisons to Nazi Germany.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

And you think that there are no women supporting many of these men that start their own businesses?

As for homelessness, it would be worth reading into the causes of homelessness and then the reasons why people stay homeless.

I started a thread on Male Relationship caused homelessness and not one reply - my thread titles mustnt be provoctive enough

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055879891

But I cite the Irish Medical Journal

http://www.imj.ie/Issue_detail.aspx?issueid=+&pid=95&type=Papers

Jeez the support given to men who find themselves homeless is less then that available to prisoners released from Mountjoy or illegal immigrant families or to travellers.

Maybe I should have said young Irish Homeless Males are the new blacks

SugarHigh wrote: »

Were in the 21st century now. It just highlights how long you probably have been making ridiculous comparisons to Nazi Germany.

There is a place for feminazi banter in a slagging match though but it would be lost on iptba because he is such an MCP.Whereas I am just an unreconstructed white male

I can see where he is coming from. During the Irish Famine the Choctaw Tribe of New Orleans who lived in appalling conditions on a reservation heard about the Irish Famine and held a tribal collection and sent over the equivalent in todays money of £10,000 for famine relief.

They thought the Irish worse of than themselves. Thats by way of comparison. Irish men dont slip through the cracks -there are no cracks to slip through.

To finish - if I was to write to one Irish Politician with a record of speaking on mens rights -who would I write to. Just 1.

Thats not a tall order - I can think of who to write to on all sorts of issues just not that .

Dr Galen

This thread runs the risj of veering off on all sorts of tangents. Unfortunately, when threads on vague enough topics get started it can be hard to keep it on one track.

Lets not let this thread become yet another one, with reams of unlinked posts under a great big umbrella heading.

We'll see where it goes, but, if it becomes another thread re-hashing the same topics and ideas as has been covered in other threads (read:soapboxing) then we'll close it down and the discussions can continue in the other threads.

Cheers

MM

CDfm

Ah Dr G - the new moniker behoves you.

I was just trying to lighten the mood a tad by avoiding cliches and putting up some factual info.

Its all very well to use epithets and non sequiturs like the letter writter to the Examiner did. While I think the letter was lazy soapboxing( others may well disagree with me) I thought it worthwhile to factually discuss it albeit with a bit of good humour.

Sorry if I went of in a tangent but what I was doing was objectively putting down facts that the "matriarchical hypotheses" could be objectively measured against.

Again, sorry for going off in a tangent. I am sorry if I offended anyone.

metrovelvet

cdfm-

If you had suggested doing two word swaps within the letter, your point would be clear.

Subsitute, or do a find and replace, with women for men and magdalene laundries and women, and it's clearer.

CDfm

I cant see the connection - people were treated awfully and the Magdelene Laundries were run by women. In the same way you have educated muslim women bringing up kids now.

I think there is an ethical dilemma here for women with sons-especially ones supporting an ideology that will leave their sons disadvantaged.Its like saying that the sins of previous generations are inherited down the male line-so patriarchy used in this sense is like some sort of Catholic Original sin. Even though it was something supported by mothers.

You have to draw the line somewhere.

I dont see a campaign against Muslim women for bringing their children up in accordence with their beliefs.To imply that in some way they dont have free will is disingenuous or that the Magdelene Sisters didnt have free will is equally wrong.

You cant treat a gender as an enemy you can identify bad things with beliefs and try to eliminate them.

Conversely I think fathers with daughters have it cracked. I certainly would want my daughter to have every opportunity my son has and he her.

I hope this explains how I see the logic of what you are saying and doesnt sound like a rant.

vicecreamsundae

in the first line she is simply pointing out her dissatisfaction with women being underrepresented -both in the governmental positions that brought about this whole crisis and in the media commentary. i don't see her putting down men, but pointing out how the majority of men in the powerful positions relating to this whole issue are men, and that the majority of "experts" being asked to comment on it, are also men. it is what it is.

but that bit about "men caused this problem and only men can fix it"...unless she is being sarcastic, that's idiotic. is she being sarcastic?!?

CDfm

vicecreamsundae wrote: »

in the first line she is simply pointing out her dissatisfaction with women being underrepresented -both in the governmental positions that brought about this whole crisis and in the media commentary. i don't see her putting down men, but pointing out how the majority of men in the powerful positions relating to this whole issue are men, and that the majority of "experts" being asked to comment on it, are also men. it is what it is.

The language used just the word patriarchy is not one you would ever hear in normal conversation except by gender feminists. Excellent choice of word as the reader immediately knows the point is going to kick ass.

The Bank with the most trouble Anglo Irish had a very able Irish Businesswoman on its Board as a non-exec. She was also on the Board of the stock exchange(that has a regulatory function) where the banks were listed.Bank of Ireland has 2 females out of 10 directors etc. Directors have considerable responsibility.

Now I know its not 50% at the top but I would expect that senior regulators and auditors would also have included women at a very senior level.

So her argument is at best simplistic on the participation of women in senior roles in the banking crisis or in Irish businesses but it packs a punch.

but that bit about "men caused this problem and only men can fix it"...unless she is being sarcastic, that's idiotic. is she being sarcastic?!?

No - she has used a technique called framing to make a point. Its a non sequitor and its a logical fallacy.

As a piece of writting it is extremely well written and it would surprise me if the writer did not have journalistic or PR expertise.Simply, from the concise nature of the paragraphs and the way the paragraphs stand allows a sub-editor to place it.Paragraphs are written in a stand alone way in ascending order so the least important can be lobbed of and the letter still makes sense.

I would give the writer 10/10 for her letter.We are discussing it -so it is very good.

It may surprise some people (and not others) but lots of letters published of this nature are professionally written for this purpose as part of campaigns to repeat a message.

tommyboy2222

From the website:

http://www.social-phil.tcd.ie/SAPRG/Florence_Craven.php

Dr. Florence Craven is Post-doctoral Research Fellow in the Social Attitude and Policy Research Group. Her undergraduate degree in Sociology was from the NUI, Maynooth and she holds a Diploma in Statistics from Trinity College. She was awarded a PhD from Trinity in 2006, which she carried out in the Centre for Gender and Women’s Studies. The subject of her dissertation was “An Analysis of the Social, Religious and Gender Role Attitudes of Catholic and Protestant Women in the Republic of Ireland: A Comparative Study.” This is currently in press as a book to be published by Mellen.

Says it all really...................

iptba

SugarHigh wrote: »

Were in the 21st century now. It just highlights how long you probably have been making ridiculous comparisons to Nazi Germany.

You are correct that it was the last century but I imagine few people were confused so I imagine is that that wasn't what motivated you to raise the point.

I have made few of such comparisons ever* and probably never in the 20th century when I generally kept my thoughts to myself on gender issues. But I got fed up when few people spoke out about so many issues (like men-bashing) and unbalanced debates and discussions continued.
This letter is the sort of thing that I feel is worth highlighting, including the fact that it was published.

I, and I know plenty of other men, bear little responsibility for causing the banking crisis and don't want to be scape-goated for a "crime I/we didn't commit".

* not sure I ever specifically referred to the attitude to Jews in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

As a piece of writting it is extremely well written and it would surprise me if the writer did not have journalistic or PR expertise.Simply, from the concise nature of the paragraphs and the way the paragraphs stand allows a sub-editor to place it.Paragraphs are written in a stand alone way in ascending order so the least important can be lobbed of and the letter still makes sense.

I would give the writer 10/10 for her letter.We are discussing it -so it is very good.

It may surprise some people (and not others) but lots of letters published of this nature are professionally written for this purpose as part of campaigns to repeat a message.

Drat, you've outed me as part of her campaign team. But I'll make sure not to blow your cover.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

I cant see the connection - people were treated awfully and the Magdelene Laundries were run by women. In the same way you have educated muslim women bringing up kids now.

I think there is an ethical dilemma here for women with sons-especially ones supporting an ideology that will leave their sons disadvantaged.Its like saying that the sins of previous generations are inherited down the male line-so patriarchy used in this sense is like some sort of Catholic Original sin. Even though it was something supported by mothers.

You have to draw the line somewhere.

I dont see a campaign against Muslim women for bringing their children up in accordence with their beliefs.To imply that in some way they dont have free will is disingenuous or that the Magdelene Sisters didnt have free will is equally wrong.

You cant treat a gender as an enemy you can identify bad things with beliefs and try to eliminate them.

Conversely I think fathers with daughters have it cracked. I certainly would want my daughter to have every opportunity my son has and he her.

I hope this explains how I see the logic of what you are saying and doesnt sound like a rant.

What?

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

Drat, you've outed me as part of her campaign team. But I'll make sure not to blow your cover.

you have had two letters in two weeks in the national press by academics promoting their gender biased work and are media savvy.other than that -its old hat. political parties, trade associations, trade unions and activists etc do the same everyday.

it was a bit of fun working it out having worked in marketing and pr to analyse and explain to people the hows and whys of a letter like this and the black art of PR.

i would get bored looking at this all the time and my g/f would kill me.

metrovelvet wrote: »

What?

You have posted before that you have a son. So Im just asking if he has the male original sin thing too as part ofbeing male. How could he be responsible for the magdelene laundries any more than Dr Galen would be or I would be.

its just a comment and it was a bit rhetorical really.

metrovelvet

You've lost me completely.

My point to you was illustrating the banking scandal as some sort of evidence of the criminality or ineptutude of men is akin to illustrating the magdalene laundries as an example of the cruelties of women.

I dont get why you started talking about muslims and original sin. Or mothers and sons.

What have they got to do with the price of tea in china?

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

My point to you was illustrating the banking scandal as some sort of evidence of the criminality or ineptutude of men is akin to illustrating the magdalene laundries as an example of the cruelties of women.

when i posted saying i did not get her point you respomded with something mentioning thr magdelene launderies.

sorry i misunderstood

panda100

Stupid letter,its really the capitalist system to blame rather than a single gender.

I usually pick up the Examiner on a Saturday but the large front page picture of 6 Irish models dressed in tight Munster Tops yesterday has put another paper on my never to buy again list. Nothing spoils my Saturday morning quite like the media's crusade in confining women's 'role' in sport to just looking pretty on the sideline.

Dr Galen

its only my opinion Panda, but capaitalism didn't cause the mess we find ourselves in. The perverted version of crony capaitalism we operated here for the best part of 2 decades did though. Whole other debate though

G-Money

I read a line one time and it said that white's are basically the only "race" now that you can make fun of and be racist towards and no-one bats and eyelid and nothing happens. I think it's becoming the same with men.

Basically anything can be said and we're supposed to just sit there and take it.

Herbal Deity

Dr Galen wrote: »

its only my opinion Panda, but capaitalism didn't cause the mess we find ourselves in. The perverted version of crony capaitalism we operated here for the best part of 2 decades did though. Whole other debate though

tbh, there's no single cause for the mess. It seems to have given many people an excuse to blame it anything they happen to oppose, however, be it patriarchy, capitalism, immigrants, bankers, the government etc.

CDfm

Ah cmon HD - it was women - we all know that ladies like a nice house

Dr G - will I get my PhD with that nugget??


The real cause was that the Government and that includes the Dept of Finance and Central Bank failed to control lending ( Money Supply) by the banks. Its what central banks do.

Say you have an average industrial wage of 35 k for a single person the max mortgage is 3 times that so the avarage house price should be 110K.

So prices are lots more than that as are building costs,labour costs etc and on this the government go in taxes and which hands went out by Public Servants etc for higher wages, the Health Service and all the other services that wanted money.

In turn -what funded it was money borrowed by the banks from abroad which was in excess of their own capital abilities. Taxes were paid in on the tranactions and paid out again.

It was visable to everyone and the economics of it is fairly transparent. The politicians of all parties and civil servants and the unions all knew.
(Its a fair bet they knew because if I could work it out they could).

They all lacked the bottle to turn of the taps which is what the Central Bank and Dept of Finance and Politicians are there for.

And thats how it happened.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

you have had two letters in two weeks in the national press by academics promoting their gender biased work and are media savvy.other than that -its old hat. political parties, trade associations, trade unions and activists etc do the same everyday.

it was a bit of fun working it out having worked in marketing and pr to analyse and explain to people the hows and whys of a letter like this and the black art of PR.

i would get bored looking at this all the time and my g/f would kill me.

Not sure if you are talking about something specific or generally about the GC, but I reckon I'll probably be posting a lot less in the coming month (various deadlines coming up) and probably, in the long-term, at least a bit less on average. Just got some stuff off my chest.

CDfm

I get really into it myself and had to make a New Years resolution not to be a Mens Rights bore.

Its cool when you get a nice buzz going on a thread with people like Taconnal ( hiya Taco) and Dr G contributing.

I enjoyed the letters you posted because they were by two academics who are involved in training social workers etc.And tGC is the best place to discuss it.

The nice thing about tGC is that we can decide to make it positive.

Its good to get stuff off your chest too but you can get too stuck into it.