Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? READ POST 1

silverharp · 10-08-2017 08:26AM

^^

a little sceptical of the girls here, could be classed as attention seeking, we will never know if their motives are pure :pac:

Da Boss · 10-08-2017 08:41AM

I,a man,experience sexism personally on a daily basis. Sexism is in every aspect of life, example in Dáil Éireann this gender quota malarkey is sexism at the extreme,to the advantage of women. Gender shouldn't matter in the parliament,ability should. Likewise is society men are expected to hold a door 4 example 4 women,never see the reverse. Women I believe are playing this sexism token to their advantage,playing the victim

Sleepy · 10-08-2017 10:53AM

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Mmm...no, and not just because of my own example - some of the most amazing ladies I've ever met have...guilty pleasures in the form of liking shows you wouldn't think of; We're talking about smart, witty, competent, self-confident young women who also happened to enjoy...Coronation Street or East Enders. I wouldn't watch ten second of footage from these shows, but the fact someone likes them, clearly, doesn't mean anything other than that - that they like these soaps.

It depends on the show and the motivations for watching it I guess.

Sex and the City was seen as "aspirational" viewing of a lifestyle many women desired: getting to wear "fabulous" clothes, having a closet with more pairs of shoes than there are days in the year, being surrounded with witty (read bitchy) "gay best friends", working a part-time job that involved nothing more than over-analysing one's own life or organising parties, eating out every night, having one's own apartment in one of the most expensive cities in the world and never having to live with the consequences of one's actions aside from feeling sad until your friends bring you for another round of cosmos. (to be fair, I do remember an episode where Carrie was made face up to the "reality" that she had no savings due to living like this - reality would have had her in bankruptcy court).

Maybe that's a fun fantasy for some young women (in a similar vein to how the ladykilling, rolling in sports cars and smoking weed lifestlye of Entourage might have been something of a fantasy lifestyle for many young men) though at the time it was presented as something to actually aspire to, or as something "empowering" to watch because the leads acknowledged that, shock horror, most women enjoy sex.

The soaps, whilst muck, have never really presented themselves as any more than they are: mindless, over-the-top drama. SATC was pushed as a lifestyle guide by the womens publishing industry, no doubt because the likes of Jimmy Choo, Chanel and Pantene (or whichever cosmetics company had hired Sarah Jessica Parker for a shoot that month) paid handsomely for advertising in their glossy fashion magazines.

In much the same way that Star Trek could be seen as pushing a (hopelessly?) aspirational view of a future of the possibilities of a truly united humanity, Sex and the City can be seen as selling an insidious version of consequenceless consumerism wrapped up in the flag of third wave feminism.

Perhaps I'm just jumping on a hobby horse as I really, really hated that show and the influence I could see it having on quite a lot of women while it was on the air (perhaps the modern equivalent would be TOWIE or Jersey Shore or the likes?) but I do think that the tv, movies, music, games or art of any kind one is into can be an important factor in identifying a compatible partner.

Mrs Sleepy doesn't like everything I enjoy (Star Trek would actually be a perfect example!) and I don't like everything she does (She'd still follow Home & Away for example) but a huge amount of the stuff we like is shared and that can be important imo. When it's a cold winter's night and the kids are in bed it's nice to be able to settle down on the couch and not have to argue over what to put on...

To quote a movie/book we both like:

"what really matters is what you like, not what you are like... Books, records, films -- these things matter. Call me shallow but it's the fuckin' truth" - Rob Gordon, High Fidelity

ancapailldorcha · 10-08-2017 11:58AM

maybe

Sleepy wrote: »

Maybe that's a fun fantasy for some young women (in a similar vein to how the ladykilling, rolling in sports cars and smoking weed lifestlye of Entourage might have been something of a fantasy lifestyle for many young men) though at the time it was presented as something to actually aspire to, or as something "empowering" to watch because the leads acknowledged that, shock horror, most women enjoy sex.

The difference is that men have always been encouraged to sow their wild oats whereas women were expected to be whiter than white. It's only been very recently that this has changed and SATC likely played a part in it.

I moved into a place in Dublin which had Comedy Central (or Paramount Comedy as it was then known, God I feel old) and I'd no idea what it was so I watched some episodes as it was all that was on. I think that it's slop for the reasons that you've alluded to but it's important slop in a cultural sense. Frankly, if it had been made in the age of social media, it'd have been 10 times worse so there's that.

Sleepy · 10-08-2017 12:25PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The difference is that men have always been encouraged to sow their wild oats whereas women were expected to be whiter than white. It's only been very recently that this has changed and SATC likely played a part in it.

I really think it's role in that was greatly, greatly over-stated.

iptba · 10-08-2017 02:23PM

Sleepy wrote: »

It depends on the show and the motivations for watching it I guess.

Sex and the City was seen as "aspirational" viewing of a lifestyle many women desired: getting to wear "fabulous" clothes, having a closet with more pairs of shoes than there are days in the year, being surrounded with witty (read bitchy) "gay best friends", working a part-time job that involved nothing more than over-analysing one's own life or organising parties, eating out every night, having one's own apartment in one of the most expensive cities in the world and never having to live with the consequences of one's actions aside from feeling sad until your friends bring you for another round of cosmos. (to be fair, I do remember an episode where Carrie was made face up to the "reality" that she had no savings due to living like this - reality would have had her in bankruptcy court).

Maybe that's a fun fantasy for some young women (in a similar vein to how the ladykilling, rolling in sports cars and smoking weed lifestlye of Entourage might have been something of a fantasy lifestyle for many young men) though at the time it was presented as something to actually aspire to, or as something "empowering" to watch because the leads acknowledged that, shock horror, most women enjoy sex.

The soaps, whilst muck, have never really presented themselves as any more than they are: mindless, over-the-top drama. SATC was pushed as a lifestyle guide by the womens publishing industry, no doubt because the likes of Jimmy Choo, Chanel and Pantene (or whichever cosmetics company had hired Sarah Jessica Parker for a shoot that month) paid handsomely for advertising in their glossy fashion magazines.

In much the same way that Star Trek could be seen as pushing a (hopelessly?) aspirational view of a future of the possibilities of a truly united humanity, Sex and the City can be seen as selling an insidious version of consequenceless consumerism wrapped up in the flag of third wave feminism.

Perhaps I'm just jumping on a hobby horse as I really, really hated that show and the influence I could see it having on quite a lot of women while it was on the air (perhaps the modern equivalent would be TOWIE or Jersey Shore or the likes?) but I do think that the tv, movies, music, games or art of any kind one is into can be an important factor in identifying a compatible partner.

Mrs Sleepy doesn't like everything I enjoy (Star Trek would actually be a perfect example!) and I don't like everything she does (She'd still follow Home & Away for example) but a huge amount of the stuff we like is shared and that can be important imo. When it's a cold winter's night and the kids are in bed it's nice to be able to settle down on the couch and not have to argue over what to put on...

To quote a movie/book we both like:

"what really matters is what you like, not what you are like... Books, records, films -- these things matter. Call me shallow but it's the fuckin' truth" - Rob Gordon, High Fidelity

I remember a line where one of the characters, Carrie I think, referred to her clothes and shoes as her pension (can't remember the exact quote). I thought that was interesting.

Pawwed Rig · 10-08-2017 02:37PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The difference is that men have always been encouraged to sow their wild oats whereas women were expected to be whiter than white.

I don't think they have really. Especially in an Irish context

um7y1h83ge06nx · 11-08-2017 02:45PM

This Cafe Charges an 18% 'Man Tax' to Highlight Gender Pay Gap

DGTXrv2VYAAILTn.jpg:large

JRant · 11-08-2017 02:52PM

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

This Cafe Charges an 18% 'Man Tax' to Highlight Gender Pay Gap

What sort of plonker would pay an extra 18% on already overpriced coffee?

kunst nugget · 11-08-2017 03:16PM

maybe

I wonder would they're be 17% tax on young, single women over here?

Zulu · 11-08-2017 03:51PM

No

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wonder would they're be 17% tax on young, single women over here?

Don't be a fool; that would be blatant and despicable sexism.

py2006 · 11-08-2017 04:09PM

The irony of rule 3

frostyjacks · 11-08-2017 04:20PM

I suppose these girls would have no issue being billed for the sacrifices made by men on their behalf at Passchendaele, the Somme, Normandy etc. They really do live in their own little world.

um7y1h83ge06nx · 11-08-2017 04:20PM

py2006 wrote: »

The irony of rule 3

Yes I love that one, makes them look very foolish.

Although great Brownie points to be had if I don some white armour and ride over on my trusty steed. ;-)

deaddonkey15 · 11-08-2017 04:39PM

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

This Cafe Charges an 18% 'Man Tax' to Highlight Gender Pay Gap

Is this even legal?

murphm45 · 11-08-2017 04:54PM

Kind of dip in and out of this forum and this seems like the best place to "highlight" this. An interesting take on the whole debate in yesterdays examiner that I think is worth a read.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/discrimination-is-wrong-but-dont-assume-work-is-everyones-priority-456698.html

ancapailldorcha · 11-08-2017 05:31PM

maybe

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Is this even legal?

It is in Australia where there may not be the same equality legislation that there is in Europe.

JRant · 11-08-2017 06:09PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wonder would they're be 17% tax on young, single women over here?

To correctly quote the figures that feminists love to use it should be women save -17% on purchases.

ligerdub · 11-08-2017 10:15PM

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Is this even legal?

It is. Apparently the extra charge from men is a voluntary thing and they can insist on the same price as women.

There's no way it could be considered legal otherwise.

It's a vegan cafe apparently. It'll be closed within the year if there's any justice in the world.

iptba · 11-08-2017 10:58PM

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

This Cafe Charges an 18% 'Man Tax' to Highlight Gender Pay Gap

This was just covered on Euronews. Only one side of the debate was given. They said no man has refused to pay though it is supposedly optional.

red ears · 11-08-2017 11:00PM

Woman have priority seating.. so its not about equality.

Calhoun · 12-08-2017 04:12PM

As pointed out in the Twitter comments the pay gap is at those on higher incomes yet the poorer being discriminated against.

I would say something like this is being done for marketing reasons but I feel the shop should go out of business for discriminatory practices. Switch things around and watch the internet but for a few days.

silverharp · 13-08-2017 09:34PM

its the little victories :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0T8SiuqB5g

Cookie_Monster · 15-08-2017 09:04PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It is in Australia where there may not be the same equality legislation that there is in Europe.

A cafe here in NZ has mirrored it now as well

The backlash has been pretty strong, lose base of reality and all that.

Calhoun · 15-08-2017 09:40PM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

A cafe here in NZ has mirrored it now as well

The backlash has been pretty strong, lose base of reality and all that.

What do you mean the backlash has been strong ?

Is it another vegan cafe ?

ligerdub · 15-08-2017 11:29PM

Australia and New Zealand seems to be a haven for this sort of ****e. Am I being unfair there?

mrkiscool2 · 15-08-2017 11:47PM

ligerdub wrote: »

Australia and New Zealand seems to be a haven for this sort of ****e. Am I being unfair there?

Australia more so. They were so opposed to the "Red Pill" documentary (which is great, by the way) they did an off-air interview with Cassie Jaye and edited out any parts that didn't fit the narrative. They have crazy regulations on stuff to ensure "diversity" and have now asked their military to only hire females for all army roles.

iptba · 16-08-2017 12:21AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Australia more so. They were so opposed to the "Red Pill" documentary (which is great, by the way) they did an off-air interview with Cassie Jaye and edited out any parts that didn't fit the narrative. They have crazy regulations on stuff to ensure "diversity" and have now asked their military to only hire females for all army roles.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2017/08/australian-army-reportedly-bans-hiring-men-in-a-bid-to-boost-women-numbers.html
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/36682473/australian-army-ban-on-male-recruits-sparks-sunrise-debate/#page1

red ears · 18-08-2017 07:56AM

Little bit of good news for boys in education.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/08/17/a-level-results-2017-first-rise-top-grades-six-years-despite/

Boys are beating girls to top A-level grades for the first time in 17 years - with 26.6 per cent of boys achieving coveted A* or A grades compared to just 26.1 per cent of girls.

silverharp · 18-08-2017 08:12AM

red ears wrote: »

Little bit of good news for boys in education.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/08/17/a-level-results-2017-first-rise-top-grades-six-years-despite/

Boys are beating girls to top A-level grades for the first time in 17 years - with 26.6 per cent of boys achieving coveted A* or A grades compared to just 26.1 per cent of girls.

I heard that yesterday and the reason given was amending the courses. What in broad terms did they do?

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

Comments

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? READ POST 1