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

deaddonkey15 · 03-04-2019 4:26pm

...Ghost... wrote: »

I was browsing the jobs market when I came across THIS.

The drive to get women into STEM is not just OTT, it is now discriminating against men.

If you don't want to read the linked content, the short story is that McAfee has a female only scholarship for leaving cert students. I looked, there was no male scholarships available. At the end of the post, they say they prohibit discrimination based on age, race, religion, gender etc etc. How is this scholarship not discrimination?

I emailed them about their post and sought clarification on their discrimination policy and have yet receive a reply.

easyJet have been doing it for years for their pilot cadetship.

https://careers.easyjet.com/pilots/amy-johnson-initiative/

Sleepy · 03-04-2019 5:06pm

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I lived in a country where the local women didn't really like feminism. They saw it as condescending, silly or just not really relevant. Yet, you would see women going out for runs at every hour of the night. They were surprised when I asked if they felt nervous coming home at 3 or 4 am, or going to a strangers house.

What country was that?

terryduff12 · 03-04-2019 5:07pm

givyjoe wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

Think my personal favourite quote was when a woman who had a miscarriage in the hospital and already had a bad experience with a nurse, another nurse came over the woman thought she was gonna console her but the nurse said life's a bitch and we all die so just get over it.

Calhoun · 03-04-2019 8:01pm

terryduff12 wrote: »

Think my personal favourite quote was when a woman who had a miscarriage in the hospital and already had a bad experience with a nurse, another nurse came over the woman thought she was gonna console her but the nurse said life's a bitch and we all die so just get over it.

You got to imagine though they have seen some fairly bad crap and over time it desensitizes them.

Not saying its an excuse but you have a very poorly managed health service in Ireland and we have it staffed all wrong so it can turn people bad.

Calhoun · 03-04-2019 8:04pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Its about to get a lot worse...the state is putting pressure on the private sector to release their "gender pay gap"...interestingly, nothing about the "hours worked gender gap"...this pressure will lead to fines, mark my words.

Private sector companies will soon be given targets to get women into senior positions in private companies....this is happening, the hard left element of feminism is starting to breach into private companies....this is socialism!!

Will the state compensate the owners of private companies that reach those targets if they go out of business? Will the f##k!!!

You can have equality or you can have the free market economy but you cannot have both!

They are putting pressure on them from an optics perspective but they aren't about to go and kill the golden goose that is FDI. They aren't stupid, with all the brexit talk allot of this has gone quite.

The only thing most companies believe in is the green, so sure they will put in some token positions if they have to but when all you care about is making money diversity politics will just be another fad.

The Specialist · 03-04-2019 8:58pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Its about to get a lot worse...the state is putting pressure on the private sector to release their "gender pay gap"...interestingly, nothing about the "hours worked gender gap"...this pressure will lead to fines, mark my words.

Private sector companies will soon be given targets to get women into senior positions in private companies....this is happening, the hard left element of feminism is starting to breach into private companies....this is socialism!!

Will the state compensate the owners of private companies that reach those targets if they go out of business? Will the f##k!!!

You can have equality or you can have the free market economy but you cannot have both!

Such utter bull**** - I get about 40k a year for a very stressful and busy job, while an “assistant “ to me earns 39.5. They do one daily task I assign to them per day and spend of the rest of their time (seemingly) in the smoking shed or canteen. Meanwhile I’m on client calls all day and investigating complicated issues for 500 quid
more.

Gender pay gap my bollix, **** outta that.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 05-04-2019 1:15am

Silentcorner wrote: »

Its about to get a lot worse...the state is putting pressure on the private sector to release their "gender pay gap"...interestingly, nothing about the "hours worked gender gap"...this pressure will lead to fines, mark my words.

Private sector companies will soon be given targets to get women into senior positions in private companies....this is happening, the hard left element of feminism is starting to breach into private companies....this is socialism!!

Will the state compensate the owners of private companies that reach those targets if they go out of business? Will the f##k!!!

You can have equality or you can have the free market economy but you cannot have both!

True, competition and 'equality' don't go hand in hand.

TomSweeney · 12-04-2019 2:36pm

Have you seen the media are just focusing on the woman involved in the Black Hole picture ?
It was a massive team of individuals yet they focus on her alone.
Crazy, don't get me wrong, I'm sure she's top of her field, but you can see BBC/MSM are just really trying to push this woman in STEM story.

H3llR4iser · 12-04-2019 4:38pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

...
You can have equality or you can have the free market economy but you cannot have both!

You absolutely CAN have both - free market economy and equality of opportunities, not equality of outcomes...if A is better/more capable/more experienced than B at doing X, A should be paid more than B, regardless of what set of genitals are between their legs - or whatever they "identify" as.

In my own team, the highest paid person is the only woman in the team; We're talking IT or "STEM" if you wish.

I personally asked, insisted and obtained an above average salary increase for her this year; Not because I am some sort of "women's rights hero" but because she's the person with the widest array of relevant skills in the team, the most dependable / autonomous and I don't want to risk her leaving for a company that's willing to pay more.

This whole "gender pay gap" is going to be a royal clusterfcuk until somebody finally knocks a bit of sense into things; The most likely and logical outcome is that the alignment will happen downwards, rather than upwards: the men who are paid more due to experience, skills or working hours will see a reduction of income as the companies will claim they are "overpaid".

Funnily enough, this will essentially backfire towards plenty of women who'll suddenly find that their husband's company won't pay for his overtime anymore...putting more strain on her own salary. Karma.

silverharp · 12-04-2019 4:38pm

Sky were doing a piece on actors having to look buff these days, so this point would have been brought up before when the media only focused on “unobtainable” female beauty standards that it worked both ways so what's the problem?. However the tone I took from it was that the perspective was from “weedy” actor types that weren't happy. Personally I’d see an actor like Jason Stratham as inspirational that someone in their early 50’s can look at good for example. The irony was that they mentioned actors in the past like Cary Grant that “oozed masculinity” , yet isn’t that the very attitude that is being deemed toxic and privileged these days?

iptba · 12-04-2019 5:23pm

silverharp wrote: »

Sky were doing a piece on actors having to look buff these days, so this point would have been brought up before when the media only focused on “unobtainable” female beauty standards that it worked both ways so what's the problem?. However the tone I took from it was that the perspective was from “weedy” actor types that weren't happy. Personally I’d see an actor like Jason Stratham as inspirational that someone in their early 50’s can look at good for example. The irony was that they mentioned actors in the past like Cary Grant that “oozed masculinity” , yet isn’t that the very attitude that is being deemed toxic and privileged these days?

Just one example that doesn’t prove much but I recall seeing an interview with two female actors and one male actor from a movie who were all young enough and attractive/slim (i.e. not playing characters who weren’t good looking). They talked about some party but the male actor either couldn’t go or couldn’t indulge at all because of their 9(??)-month regime to bulk up and tone up for the part (the female actors brought this up). Suggested to me the very demanding standards being presented to men at least in this movie.

Calhoun · 12-04-2019 9:01pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

This whole "gender pay gap" is going to be a royal clusterfcuk until somebody finally knocks a bit of sense into things; The most likely and logical outcome is that the alignment will happen downwards, rather than upwards: the men who are paid more due to experience, skills or working hours will see a reduction of income as the companies will claim they are "overpaid".

Funnily enough, this will essentially backfire towards plenty of women who'll suddenly find that their husband's company won't pay for his overtime anymore...putting more strain on her own salary. Karma.

It won't backfire because the woman have more strain on their salary, it will backfire because we no longer reward for effort. If i don't get rewarded adequately for extra work guess what happens? it just wont be done.

I actually see the net-net of crap like this being a rise in industrial relations/unionization.

Calhoun · 12-04-2019 9:29pm

TomSweeney wrote: »

Have you seen the media are just focusing on the woman involved in the Black Hole picture ?
It was a massive team of individuals yet they focus on her alone.
Crazy, don't get me wrong, I'm sure she's top of her field, but you can see BBC/MSM are just really trying to push this woman in STEM story.

Decent article https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/438617-white-male-scientist-slams-sexist-trolls-using-his-work-on-black ,which is a good counter balance to this and from what i have read she is not claiming to have done it alone.

Apparently there is allot of trolling against her which is pretty horrible to be fair.

TomSweeney · 12-04-2019 10:37pm

Calhoun wrote: »

Decent article https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/438617-white-male-scientist-slams-sexist-trolls-using-his-work-on-black ,which is a good counter balance to this and from what i have read she is not claiming to have done it alone.

Apparently there is allot of trolling against her which is pretty horrible to be fair.

No no, I am blaming the media here, she apparently has mentioned many times it was a team effort.

Calhoun · 12-04-2019 11:59pm

I think the whole thing is absurd, not having a go at you but the people on both sides online. We should be celebrating this discovery for what it is and not descending into the usual point scoring.

H3llR4iser · 13-04-2019 9:20pm

Calhoun wrote: »

It won't backfire because the woman have more strain on their salary, it will backfire because we no longer reward for effort. If i don't get rewarded adequately for extra work guess what happens? it just wont be done.

I actually see the net-net of crap like this being a rise in industrial relations/unionization.

You'de surprised how many people work the crazy hours even without the salary - I've never worked for a company that paid extra time, but there have always been plenty of people stayng 9-10 hours each day for whatever reason. Interestingly enough, they weren't even the ones who had a brilliant career path.

As for the backfiring, I meant exclusively in terms of a family setup. If one of the two "parents" income goes down, the pain is usually shared.

Calhoun wrote: »

Decent article https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/438617-white-male-scientist-slams-sexist-trolls-using-his-work-on-black ,which is a good counter balance to this and from what i have read she is not claiming to have done it alone.

Apparently there is allot of trolling against her which is pretty horrible to be fair.

TomSweeney wrote: »

No no, I am blaming the media here, she apparently has mentioned many times it was a team effort.

There is no doubt whatsoever that she is not and never has been trying to TAKE credit for a team effort; Even 'though, as an engineer, after reading that her role was to develop some of the imaging algorithms, I am inclined to think her contribution was absolutely CENTRAL to the success of the effort.

The issue here is that she is being overexposed compared to her colleagues and this is happening exclusively because she's a woman; Before this post, I didn't know the names of any of the 200+ scientist involved except for hers - because every single news outlet put her on top of the page with "the WOMAN who took a picture of a black hole" lines or some permutation of it, trying to cash in on the frankly absurdly endearing picture of Ms. Bouman's excitement at seeing the image for the first time. She is de facto being portrayed as the sole contributor to the research.

And yet again, anyone daring to say anything against this approach in reporting and fact distortion is immediately labelled as "sexist", a "troll" or my favourite: a "conservative".

Then of course there'll the 12-years olds (or the 40-years-olds with a 12-years-old brain) making "kitchen" or "sammich" jokes, but one would imagine those would be ignored by now.

...Ghost... · 17-04-2019 1:02pm

I had posted a couple pages back about a female only scholarship. I emailed the contact to seek clarification. I heard nothing for 8 days and emailed again, commenting that a failure to reply would lead me to seek answers elsewhere. I have pasted the emails below, snipping identifiable info. I think the response was weak and danced around the subject. What do you think?

The fact that there is a financial incentive open only to females is absolutely discrimination, regardless of how many male interns they say they have.

Email 1:

Dear SNIP,

I happened to come across the career jet listing for "Cork Women in Technology Scholarship" https://www.careerjet.ie/jobview/e546d4d42d225a4d539e6381303b9f3d.html . The criteria states that you must be a female student to apply. I was hoping you could clarify the gender requirements for the scholarship, because it is at odds with the McAfee anti-discrimination statement at the foot of the listing, which states:

"McAfee prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, GENDER, national origin, age, disability, veteran status, marital status, pregnancy, gender expression or identity, sexual orientation or any other legally protected status."

My bolding and caps above.

While I applaud efforts made to encourage females into STEM, I do not support discrimination against males to achieve this goal. Are males prohibited from applying for the scholarship, or are they simply not being told that they could apply?

I eagerly await your response.

Regards,

Ghost

Email 2:

Dear SNIP,

I emailed you 8 days ago to seek clarification on the "Cork Women in Technology Scholarship" and have had no response thus far. I wanted to reach out one more time to provide an opportunity for comment on what appears to be blatant discrimination based on Gender. In the event I receive no response over the next seven days, I will endeavour to have my question satisfied by contacting the HEA and the DoJE.

Regards,

Ghost

Response 7 days later.

Dear Mr Ghost,

We refer to your emails of 2 April and 10 April requesting information on one of our scholarship programmes. I hope this email provides the necessary clarification.

You have referred to the McAfee anti-discrimination statement which, in compliance with Irish law, prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender. We note that, like McAfee, you support encouraging females into STEM and furthermore you do not support discrimination. Please be assured that McAfee is committed to non-discrimination.

The criteria for applying for the scholarship are as set out in the official literature and it is open to female students only and subject to the other criteria as set out. Male students are not included in this particular scholarship programme as males are much more likely to take up the opportunities which we can offer in this area. The scholarship programme represents one of our efforts to positively promote STEM to females who are under represented. It does not restrict access of males to our business. Our internships are taken up predominantly by male students.

This initiative is not at odds with our anti-discrimination statement or our values, but rather positively promotes them.

If you have any further questions please let me know.

Kind regards,

SNIP

The Specialist · 17-04-2019 1:17pm

Fair play for chasing them up man, that response you got is utter bull**** though. Somebody there needs to go back to school and learn the definition of "contradiction" and "hypocrisy".

Wonder if a similar programme was offered to recruit Male teachers or male childcare professionals that completely excluded any entries by females. Is that "positive discrimination" too? I mean the same thinking applies if you take their line of "males are much more likely to take up the opportunities which we can offer in this area".

...Ghost... wrote: »

You have referred to the McAfee anti-discrimination statement which, in compliance with Irish law, prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender. We note that, like McAfee, you support encouraging females into STEM and furthermore you do not support discrimination. Please be assured that McAfee is committed to non-discrimination.

The criteria for applying for the scholarship are as set out in the official literature and it is open to female students only and subject to the other criteria as set out. Male students are not included in this particular scholarship programme as males are much more likely to take up the opportunities which we can offer in this area. The scholarship programme represents one of our efforts to positively promote STEM to females who are under represented. It does not restrict access of males to our business. Our internships are taken up predominantly by male students.

This initiative is not at odds with our anti-discrimination statement or our values, but rather positively promotes them.

KrustyUCC · 17-04-2019 1:18pm

So discrimination based on gender isn't discrimination based on gender nor does discrimination based on gender restrict access of the discriminated against gender to the workplace

Who knew?

Panthro · 17-04-2019 1:21pm

maybe

Go for an interview and when they point out it's for females, ask them are they assuming your gender.

...Ghost... · 17-04-2019 1:40pm

Panthro wrote: »

Go for an interview and when they point out it's for females, ask them are they assuming your gender.

I was thinking along the same lines, so I sent this reply:

Dear SNIP,

Thank you for your response, even though I disagree in particular with your final statement about the female only scholarship positively promoting your anti-discrimination policy. The very fact that there is a financial incentive in place for one gender is discriminatory, but you have provided a viewpoint contrasting this, based on the fact that more males are likely to study and work in STEM fields.

I have one final question. If an individual was born as a male, but identifies as a female in their application, will that person meet the "female only" criteria?

Regards,

Ghost

Pawwed Rig · 17-04-2019 1:43pm

May be way off but are you quoting employment law here. The scholarship may not be deemed to fall under the legislation.

RoamingDoc · 17-04-2019 3:43pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The scholarship may not be deemed to fall under the legislation.

I think this may be correct.
I know that there are some scholarships that apply based on where people are from so would be inherently viewed as discrimination for employment purposes but are fine.

py2006 · 17-04-2019 5:03pm

California mom, 41, will avoid jail for having sex with BOTH of her teenage daughters' boyfriends, aged 14 and 15, after plying them with alcohol and cigars.

Lytle was initially charged with 21 felony sex counts but a judge said he did not believe the indicated sentence of five years of probation was appropriate

...Ghost... · 17-04-2019 5:53pm

py2006 wrote: »

California mom, 41, will avoid jail for having sex with BOTH of her teenage daughters' boyfriends, aged 14 and 15, after plying them with alcohol and cigars.

Lytle was initially charged with 21 felony sex counts but a judge said he did not believe the indicated sentence of five years of probation was appropriate

Surely a 41 year old Dad would be given the same leniency :rolleyes:

H3llR4iser · 17-04-2019 6:45pm

...Ghost... wrote: »

[cut]

... listing for "Cork Women in Technology Scholarship"

[cut]

You have referred to the McAfee anti-discrimination statement which, in compliance with Irish law, prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender. We note that, like McAfee, you support encouraging females into STEM and furthermore you do not support discrimination. Please be assured that McAfee is committed to non-discrimination.

Well well well, highlighting the above because I have deep insider knowledge of that office, a...friend used to work there a number of years ago; It's a story too long, complex and intricate to explain on a discussion forum without someone taking the p1ss and misinterpreting, but one of the running "jokes" that used to go around the office is something like this:

"If you got a d1ck, you're not getting anywhere here".

In light of the little investigation you conducted, make what you wish of it.

Next up, expect a "positive discrimination" story coming out of them about the "salary gap".

givyjoe · 17-04-2019 8:19pm

...Ghost... wrote: »

Surely a 41 year old Dad would be given the same leniency :rolleyes:

Dad? you mean monster/pervert/peado.

...Ghost... · 18-04-2019 12:03pm

givyjoe wrote: »

Dad? you mean monster/pervert/peado.

Precisely. But Mom was not called such names and it's often the case that much older women get away with having sex with boys. Any sentence is much more lenient than the sentence imposed on a man.

Pawwed Rig · 18-04-2019 1:33pm

RoamingDoc wrote: »

I know that there are some scholarships that apply based on where people are from so would be inherently viewed as discrimination for employment purposes but are fine.

Where you live is not one of the protected categories under employment law so you are free do discriminate on that basis unless it contravenes one of the actual protected categories.
For example (and correct me if I am wrong here as I am no expert) if I refuse to hire anyone from (say) Swords then I am not breaching legislation. If however the reason I am not hiring anyone from Swords is that the town is full of (say) Swiss people then I am breaching legislation.

silverharp · 19-04-2019 12:38pm

twitter keep shoving this "advert" at me. when will people push back against this attempt at social engineering which has nothing to do with equality. its kind of amusing that this is such a lefty position given that assuming Microsoft even care its just so they can have more corporate drones to pick from and keep their payroll costs down

https://twitter.com/MicrosoftEDU/status/1110907434472747011

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