Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why is sexism such a difficult topic?

1…3032343536

Comments

  • #932
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    But is there really a logical reason or is it the case, as many believe, that the old boys network is alive and well within our political parties and women find it nearly impossible to fit the list of requirements for what are deemed to be the 'qualifications' needed to be selected?

    What about elections to the Seanad? We've plenty of highly qualified women who are eligible to stand, party affliation isn't mentioned on the ballot, it's a postal vote with no campaigning needed & the hours are regular.

    The women that ran for election the last time out even lower than Dáil elections, with no political party requirements to meet.
    later12 wrote: »
    Well there's a logical reason behind almost every anomaly, i.e. it has a cause that can be deciphered; I am talking about some permissible and valid reason, not something which can merely be explained.

    Yes & extensive research has talked about the 4 Cs of cash, childcare, culture and confidence — these are talked about the reason for potential women candidates not running, both in Ireland & abroad.

    Rather than try & focus on these however, the NWC have created a new 5th C of candidate selection and have pushed on that for quotas. Which happens to be the only area which also wouldn't help other 'non-traditional' candidates — like young people, naturalised citizens, etc. who can also face the other problems.

    Which is why I was saying earlier, that it would be good to see groups focused around individual issues, rather that the umbrella of 'feminism'. This is what I meant, not all feminists supporting single fathers, etc.


  • #933
    Scanlas The 2nd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Scanlas The 2nd


    Lady Chuckles wrote: »
    Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »
    Person1:What's more important under feminist principles, increasing rights for women or gender equality? I feel this is a pertinent question as many people feel feminists only pick and choose when they want equality?

    I can't believe we're back to this... lol :pac:
    This thread is called "Why is sexism such a difficult topic?"

    I'll go ahead and answer the question anyway: Waffle, waffle, waffle... Waffle!



    There ya go. :cool:

    It would appear to me that feminism is more concerned about increasing women's rights over gender equality; gender quotas being the perfect example.


  • #934
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Feathers wrote: »
    It's also nowhere to be found on their site either. Anything posted in relation to quotas is strongly in favour of them. In fact they even publically condemned Joanna Tuffy for not attending the women-only TD meeting:

    http://www.nwci.ie/news/2011/11/14/women-will-make-politics-better-and-quotas-are-the/



    I don't think that it has been spun, anyone I've spoken to about it is well aware that it's purely about candidate selection. A lot of the failings of our current system aren't due to the qualifications of the TDs & we're not talking about replacing them with unqualified women, so I don't think that comes into it — the party whip system undermines candidates voting with their conscience or own opinion on any topic; this won't be changed by having women instead of men in the Dáil.

    In the end, it's a point of principle though — it's undemocratic to manipulate the ballot paper. Would you be in favour of quotas by the way, for minority religions, gay TDs, disabled, ethnic minorities, etc. in a similar vein? (Obviously in proportion to the % of citizens that fall into these categories.)

    Of course it's not on their site - do you really expect them to post internal discussions on-line for the likes of Kevin Myers to use in his endless anti-feminist rants?
    Do any of our political parties post details of internal debates on their websites? In most of those only the lucky few in the parliamentary party have any idea how decisions were reached, never mind the ordinary party members.

    Before the NCW decided upon any course of action consultancy documents were sent out to all the member organisations. These would then discuss the issue with their membership, a democratic decision would be reached, delegates sent and the final decision taken by a vote of those delegates.
    That decision, democratically taken, is then reported.

    The question re: ethnic minorities, Gays etc it a bit of a strawman in the light of the fact that currently 50% of the population are completely under represented. We are not talking about a minority - we are talking about a group that may actually be in the majority by 1 or 2 %.


  • #935
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Feathers wrote: »
    What about elections to the Seanad? We've plenty of highly qualified women who are eligible to stand, party affliation isn't mentioned on the ballot, it's a postal vote with no campaigning needed & the hours are regular.

    The Seanad? Are you serious?


  • #936
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    SeanW wrote: »
    To the feminists on here:

    Would you support a Traveller quota in Dail candidate selection? After all, I don't think there is a single member of the travelling community in the Dail at present! Oh the humanity! It's discrimination I tell ya

    :rolleyes:
    What makes you think the feminists on here all support the gender quota?


  • Advertisement
  • #937
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    The question re: ethnic minorities, Gays etc it a bit of a strawman in the light of the fact that currently 50% of the population are completely under represented. We are not talking about a minority - we are talking about a group that may actually be in the majority by 1 or 2 %.
    1. It's not a strawman, it's perfectly valid — that's exactly why I said in proportion to the number of citizens. If it doesn't fit with your argument though, that's another story.
    2. Women aren't under-represented, they just aren't represented by women. Democracy isn't about having someone who is just like me in the Dáil, it's about having someone who is fighting my corner in the Dáil. In this respect, quotas definitely won't work as man or women, you vote with the party line or loss the whip.

    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    The Seanad? Are you serious?

    Yes.


  • #938
    Giselle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,540 ✭✭✭Giselle


    Dudess wrote: »
    What makes you think the feminists on here all support the gender quota?

    Its an assumption. Its easier than coming up with an informed opinion.


  • #939
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Giselle wrote: »
    Dudess wrote: »
    What makes you think the feminists on here all support the gender quota?

    Its an assumption. Its easier than coming up with an informed opinion.
    All feminists think the exact same way about everything ever. Just like all philosophers do.


  • #940
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    SeanW wrote: »
    To the feminists on here:

    Would you support a Traveller quota in Dail candidate selection? After all, I don't think there is a single member of the travelling community in the Dail at present! Oh the humanity! It's discrimination I tell ya

    :rolleyes:

    All you had to do was throw in some equally ignorant comment about single mothers and that response could have been the ultimate in AH parodies... :pac:


  • #941
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Feathers wrote: »
    Yes & extensive research has talked about the 4 Cs of cash, childcare, culture and confidence — these are talked about the reason for potential women candidates not running, both in Ireland & abroad.
    Ok... and I think these are illogical i.e. ought to be socially invalid reasons for not standing for election. In the vague words of Edward VIII Something Must Be Done!

    The issue remaining is whether gender quotas are the best way of going about doing so. Personally, I think some form of gender quota is desirable, yes, but not in the manner as is being implemented by the government. Either way, as Dudess said, this is not about feminists. Quotas are an issue which go beyond feminism and primarily concern political theory. Many feminists are singing off different hymn sheets on this issue (moreso than elsewhere, perhaps).


  • Advertisement
  • #942
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Feathers wrote: »
    1. It's not a strawman, it's perfectly valid — that's exactly why I said in proportion to the number of citizens. If it doesn't fit with your argument though, that's another story.
    2. Women aren't under-represented, they just aren't represented by women. Democracy isn't about having someone who is just like me in the Dáil, it's about having someone who is fighting my corner in the Dáil. In this respect, quotas definitely won't work as man or women, you vote with the party line or loss the whip.




    Yes.

    Do you really think that Dail Eireann reflects the make-up of the population of Ireland?
    That is the crux of the question. It doesn't. But you are assuming that the proportion of lesbian and gay men in the population is not reflected in the Dail - having some insider knowledge there I wouldn't be so sure...

    Many commentators here have stated that men and women don't think the same - so extend that to our public representatives - if men and women do not think the same or experience the world in the same way then the lack of women in the Dail logically means women's 'way of thinking' or life experience is not fully represented.

    I have not said I support quotas BTW - I have said there is some merit in the arguments made for them. Enough merit that the NCW membership elected to support the idea.

    I agree with you about the Whip system - it does render backbenchers of both genders pretty obsolete. But that too is a discussion for another thread ;).

    The Seanad is yet another Thread IMO - it is completely undemocratic and in its current form about as useful as a chocolate hammer.


  • #943
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    Giselle wrote: »
    Its an assumption. Its easier than coming up with an informed opinion.

    Someone mentioned political parties earlier — when parties disagree over fundamental issues, they split — which is why we have people of parties within the left-wing of Irish politics.

    Feminist groups in the country, as far as I can see, are sitting under an umbrella group which is speaking on their behalf with no dissent.

    It's find to say that you personally have a difference of opinion. But if a teacher thinks that their pension is too high, but is happy for the INTO to push for more benefits on their behalf rather than less, it sends mixed messages.

    I always understood feminism to be a movement — around action and advocacy, rather than just "I'd like women to be treated equally" — otherwise everyone who isn't a bigot is a feminism, surely? Are there any feminist groups in the country saying we shouldn't have quotas?


  • #944
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    later12 wrote: »
    Ok... and I think these are illogical i.e. ought to be socially invalid reasons for not standing for election. In the vague words of Edward VIII Something Must Be Done!

    The issue remaining is whether gender quotas are the best way of going about doing so. Personally, I think some form of gender quota is desirable, yes, but not in the manner as is being implemented by the government.

    Gender quotas address none of these issues & are actually counter-productive, as they draw attention away from the real issue.
    later12 wrote: »
    Many feminists are singing off different hymn sheets on this issue (moreso than elsewhere, perhaps).

    There might be ones who aren't singing, but the ones that are singing are all singing from the same hymn-sheet.


  • #945
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    For the record, I'm fully in favour of having more women in the Dáil.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I have not said I support quotas BTW - I have said there is some merit in the arguments made for them. Enough merit that the NCW membership elected to support the idea.

    I agree with you about the Whip system - it does render backbenchers of both genders pretty obsolete. But that too is a discussion for another thread ;).

    The Seanad is yet another Thread IMO - it is completely undemocratic and in its current form about as useful as a chocolate hammer.

    I know, I just mentioned quotas as an example until someone else came back round to them again.

    The Seanad in it's current state is an awful waste of time & money, apart from those looking to launch a political career, in which case it's perfect. It's also an open playing field (for people eligible to run in the first place) & so is strange that so few women did, highlighting further the need to address the real issue, IMO.

    Definitely the whip system is a whole other thread :)


  • #946
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    later12 wrote:
    Many feminists are singing off different hymn sheets on this issue (moreso than elsewhere, perhaps)
    Feathers wrote: »
    ...There might be ones who aren't singing, but the ones that are singing are all singing from the same hymn-sheet.

    Why is sexism such a difficult topic?

    Poster A: *Time spent explaining well thought out and evidenced point*

    Poster B: I've got my warped perceptions and I'm keeping them *fingers in ears* LaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLa

    Poster A: But that's clearly a warped perception, look here at the evidence that contradicts that view...

    Poster B: *Repeats warped perception ad infinitum* LaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLaLa


  • #947
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Feathers wrote: »
    There might be ones who aren't singing, but the ones that are singing are all singing from the same hymn-sheet.
    No they are not. I agree with gender quotas, but not the measures being enforced which tie candidate selection to funding. I would presumably disagree with some of the people in this and other threads who support the government's moves.


  • #948
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Feathers wrote: »
    Someone mentioned political parties earlier — when parties disagree over fundamental issues, they split — which is why we have people of parties within the left-wing of Irish politics.

    Just on that point - no political parties do not necessarily split. Look at the division within FG over Kenny Vs Bruton. They discussed in in private, a vote was taken, Bruton lost now he is singing from the collective FG hymn sheet with Creighton providing back-up harmonies.
    Have those divisions ceased to exist? Is everyone in FG delighted with Kenny and his style of leadership? Or have people taken a pragmatic decision to accept the will of the majority (that is democracy after all) and reckon that to bicker in public would achieve nothing but discord, mixed messages and a dilution of the purpose of the organisation?


  • #949
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    later12 wrote: »
    Feathers wrote: »
    There might be ones who aren't singing, but the ones that are singing are all singing from the same hymn-sheet.
    No they are not. I agree with gender quotas, but not the measures being enforced which tie candidate selection to funding. I would presumably disagree with some of the people in this and other threads who support the government's moves.

    Do you consider feminism to be just an academic or theoretical standpoint, or an political/social movement that takes action and/or advocates from that standpoint?


  • #950
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,332 ✭✭✭SeanW


    The problem I have with sexism is the same problem I have with racism.

    They are both powerful words by definition but have been cheapened by abuse by the PC-left. The term "racist," "sexist" and to a lesser extent "homphobe" have been stretched to the point of incredibility.

    For example, I keep forgetting this but according to various PC-lefty types, I am a racist, homophobic sexist pig.

    I'm not a big fan of multi-culturalism and there are some degenerate backwards cultures whose immigrants I don't think we have any obligation to maintain. I'm thinking of people who commit honor killings, have multuiple wives, practice forced marriages, FGM, seem to actively despise their adopted nation and its culture. So according to the multi-cultural left, I'm a racist.

    Even though I would never dream of discriminating against anyone of colour because of their RACE, which is the entire and proper definition of racism.

    I also do not support quota filling "affirmative action" quotas in schools etc, making me a "color blind racist" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_racism.

    Again, this is in spite of my active disapproval of ethnic discrimination, and the fact that I have friends of other races.

    I also like to look at pictures/videos of good looking women. That, according to the Feminist-Left, means I'm objectifying women and am a sexist pig, and if I ever wanted to see a hooker (I haven't felt the need to so far), I would be an exploititative vile cretin sexist pig. This despite the probability that the Feminists are most likely doing the same thing with images of sexy men, and probably have a far easier time getting laid, when they want.

    Again, this despite the fact that I would never dream of discriminating against a woman in any area because of her gender.

    I also like 1980s music, in particular REO Speedwagon and Foreigner. I did not know this, but according to the Guardian, that makes me a racist, and a raving homophobe, with an, at best, questionable taste in music. Again, this despite the fact that I happily share a flat with two roomates that way inclined and I have no issues with them or their preferences whatsoever.

    If you haven't figured out by now, the PC-left doesn't like me very much, and I assure all readers, the feeling is very much mutual.

    https://u24.gov.ua/
    Join NAFO today:

    Help us in helping Ukraine.



  • #951
    Feathers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Feathers


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Feathers wrote: »
    Someone mentioned political parties earlier — when parties disagree over fundamental issues, they split — which is why we have people of parties within the left-wing of Irish politics.

    Just on that point - no political parties do not necessarily split. Look at the division within FG over Kenny Vs Bruton. They discussed in in private, a vote was taken, Bruton lost now he is singing from the collective FG hymn sheet with Creighton providing back-up harmonies.
    Have those divisions ceased to exist? Is everyone in FG delighted with Kanny and his style of leadership? Or have people taken a pragmatic decision to accept the will of the majority (that is democracy after all) and reckon that to bicker in public would achieve nothing but discord, mixed messages and a dilution of the purpose of the organisation?

    That was a leadership, rather than an ideological disagreement. FG's principles weren't in dispute.


  • Advertisement
  • #952
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Feathers wrote: »
    That was a leadership, rather than an ideological disagreement. FG's principles weren't in dispute.

    As the Leadership in many ways defines the ideology it was about what constitutes the party's principles. But we will never know the true issues as all discussion was held in secret with the majority of the party membership excluded.

    Now contrast that with the NCW who consulted extensively with its grass roots membership, placed a list of pros and cons before them, allowed them to make up their minds and vote, then formed policy according to that vote.

    I know which is the model I prefer...


  • #953
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    pissblast wrote: »
    Its inherit. Mens minds are unstable towards women. And women dont have male organs so cant really understand the pressures of been male. Lack of sex for a long enough period is like a a heroin addict with no heroin they just go mad.


    Clearly it's very hard for men. It's not like they bleed from their holes for days on a monthly basis suffering from cramps, nauesa, exhaustion, backache, fainting that comes along with a period. Ah the poor things not being able to handle a dry spell.


  • #954
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Dudess wrote: »
    What makes you think the feminists on here all support the gender quota?

    And more to the point, what makes the poster think we'd have a problem with Travellers being represented in the Dail?


  • #955
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,332 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Millicent wrote: »
    And more to the point, what makes the poster think we'd have a problem with Travellers being represented in the Dail?
    That wasn't the question. Would you support a QUOTA for Travellers in the Dail?

    https://u24.gov.ua/
    Join NAFO today:

    Help us in helping Ukraine.



  • #956
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    SeanW wrote: »
    That wasn't the question. Would you support a QUOTA for Travellers in the Dail?

    Depends on the context and method of implication but for Travellers--I might, if I'm honest. They are woefully under-represented in Irish life and politics, far worse than women.


  • #957
    Lady Chuckles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,279 ✭✭✭Lady Chuckles


    Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »
    It would appear to me that feminism is more concerned about increasing women's rights over gender equality; gender quotas being the perfect example.

    You really don't read the answers you get, do you? :rolleyes:


  • #958
    Mr.Biscuits
    Closed Accounts Posts: 750 ✭✭✭Mr.Biscuits


    K-9 wrote: »
    There is no debating with Scanlas, unless you actually want to bang your head against a brick wall.

    THIS is one of the reasons why debate threads such as these (but not just with regards to sexism) inevitably become heated and quite often end up in a car crash scenario which is more often than not, locked: 'personal attack posts'.

    Fair play to him for not rising to the bait.


  • #959
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Mr.Biscuits wrote: »
    THIS is one of the reasons why debate threads such as these (but not just with regards to sexism) become heated and end up a car crash which is more often than not, locked: personal attack posts.

    Fair play to him for not rising to the bait.

    Or perhaps it's more to do with the hit-and-run posters that make ridiculous and unfounded comments...

    Got those citations yet?


  • #960
    donfers
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭donfers


    SeanW wrote: »
    The problem I have with sexism is the same problem I have with racism.

    They are both powerful words by definition but have been cheapened by abuse by the PC-left. The term "racist," "sexist" and to a lesser extent "homphobe" have been stretched to the point of incredibility.

    For example, I keep forgetting this but according to various PC-lefty types, I am a racist, homophobic sexist pig.

    I'm not a big fan of multi-culturalism and there are some degenerate backwards cultures whose immigrants I don't think we have any obligation to maintain. I'm thinking of people who commit honor killings, have multuiple wives, practice forced marriages, FGM, seem to actively despise their adopted nation and its culture. So according to the multi-cultural left, I'm a racist.

    Even though I would never dream of discriminating against anyone of colour because of their RACE, which is the entire and proper definition of racism.

    I also do not support quota filling "affirmative action" quotas in schools etc, making me a "color blind racist" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_racism.

    Again, this is in spite of my active disapproval of ethnic discrimination, and the fact that I have friends of other races.

    I also like to look at pictures/videos of good looking women. That, according to the Feminist-Left, means I'm objectifying women and am a sexist pig, and if I ever wanted to see a hooker (I haven't felt the need to so far), I would be an exploititative vile cretin sexist pig. This despite the probability that the Feminists are most likely doing the same thing with images of sexy men, and probably have a far easier time getting laid, when they want.

    Again, this despite the fact that I would never dream of discriminating against a woman in any area because of her gender.

    I also like 1980s music, in particular REO Speedwagon and Foreigner. I did not know this, but according to the Guardian, that makes me a racist, and a raving homophobe, with an, at best, questionable taste in music. Again, this despite the fact that I happily share a flat with two roomates that way inclined and I have no issues with them or their preferences whatsoever.

    If you haven't figured out by now, the PC-left doesn't like me very much, and I assure all readers, the feeling is very much mutual.

    I agree with this....I think sometimes the forces of "good" abuse that position knowing full well many fear opposing them/challenging them or they will be smeared/associated with the opposing less politically fashionable view


    If i disagree with the methods of a feminist who in my view maybe goes too far, it does not mean I hate women or am a misogynist

    If i disagree with a civil protection group that wants to beat up some paedophile then of course that doesn't mean I condone paedophilia

    If i register my disapproval of welfare tourists it doesn't necessarily mean I am anti-immigration etc etc etc

    similarily if a woman is passionate about woman's rights it doesn't make her a man-hater etc but I would say the liberal left (incidentally where I am politically) tend to commit that kind of polarising ad hominem argumentative fallacy more often and it's extremely tiring and detracts from real debate


  • Advertisement
  • #961
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    donfers wrote: »
    I agree with this....I think sometimes the forces of "good" abuse that position knowing full well many fear opposing them/challenging them or they will be smeared/associated with the opposing less politically fashionable view


    If i disagree with the methods of a feminist who in my view maybe goes too far, it does not mean I hate women or am a misogynist

    If i disagree with a civil protection group that wants to beat up some paedophile then of course that doesn't mean I condone paedophilia

    If i register my disapproval of welfare tourists it doesn't necessarily mean I am anti-immigration etc etc etc

    similarily if a woman is passionate about woman's rights it doesn't make her a man-hater etc but I would say the liberal left (incidentally where I am politically) tend to commit that kind of polarising ad hominem argumentative fallacy more often and it's extremely tiring and detracts from real debate

    You absolutely have valid points.

    When this recession kicked in myself and some friends - all feminists most far more outspoken then I am - did enjoy a little schadenfreude giggle that the 'professionals' (i.e usually with PhDs in social sciences) who tended to command the highly paid positions in NGOs etc would need to find another lucrative field to plough while the background workers - usually the ones who started the organisation in the first place and did all the grunt work but didn't have the right 'qualifications' for the top positions- would still be there ploughing away just like always.

    I have seen it happen so many times, esp during the Celtic Tiger, a throw money at the problem and have highly paid specialists- parachuted in from 'outside' - decide what the problem is and how the money should be allocated attitude that it became a running joke.

    We did have a book running on how long one of the Rapid coordinators brought in to run the scheme in a very impoverished area of Cork City would last. This particular person had an MA from TCD in philosophy and, sadly, seemed to view anywhere outside the confines of Dublin as inherently uncivilised - a view she like to expound on in every meeting. She had no interest in actually listening to what the people of the area wanted and was far more interested in implementing schemes she had seen in Dublin, whether they worked or were relevant was not material. Consultation for her meant 'shut up and listen while I tell you uneducated yokels what is good for you for I have been to Tranty and am therefore more knowledgeable about what working class people in Cork need then working class people in Cork could ever possibly be'.

    I hates dem types....:mad:

    After 6 months of being patronised (matronised?) the women at one meeting suggested that if she didn't feck off back to Tranty soon she could find herself personally examining how clean the water in the R. Lee was since the main drainage scheme was completed....:D


Advertisement