How relevant to you is the controversy over feminism?

Wibbs · 21-06-2018 8:26am

iptba wrote: »

Maybe not a clear-cut example of anything except it sounds like women may be chosen over men next year.

It's a clear cut example of the quota brigade using social blackmail tactics through the media, social or otherwise. The "Manel Watch" collective of Irish academics against the constant #manels & lack of #genderparity in Irish academia/history/arts/culture/politics/radio/TV go around outing conferences and such as being chaired by men. Which is fine, let them at it and if there is an actual imbalance of qualified people then point to it. Mind you I would suspect it's far more about shaking the rattle of gender balance than qualifications or quality.

If a person man/woman/Tumblr member, is right for the job, ask/hire them. Hiring them prejudicially on the basis of their gender is the very thing these muppets are railing against.

Padraig Mor · 21-06-2018 9:07am

And yet outrageous sexism such as the (hopefully!) below is just fine - yip, all dem men were "pale & stale".

https://twitter.com/peterkinvara/status/1008647991140519937

21-06-2018 9:53am

And yet, if you take a look on their website for the speakers from the 2018 archives, you'll find women listed. Definitely Less women than men, but honestly, is that really sexism? Why is there this need to find equal numbers for everything that involves men? After all, I've never seen any ranting about the lack of men in Kindergarten management committees or among carers unions.

Padraig Mor · 21-06-2018 10:11am

Deleted User wrote: »

And yet, if you take a look on their website for the speakers from the 2018 archives, you'll find women listed. Definitely Less women than men, but honestly, is that really sexism? Why is there this need to find equal numbers for everything that involves men? After all, I've never seen any ranting about the lack of men in Kindergarten management committees or among carers unions.

Yeah, one of the 'anti Manel' tweets said that MacGill must think the gender breakdown reflects politics in 2018, or words to that effect...................well, it kinda does, doesn't it?

Wibbs · 21-06-2018 10:15am

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is there this need to find equal numbers for everything that involves men? After all, I've never seen any ranting about the lack of men in Kindergarten management committees or among carers unions.

.. or the dirtier, less "middle class" jobs that are majority male. In essence "Equality" when it suits.

As I've said before "feminism" has become very much a suburban white middle class politic, hence much of its focus. If you filter it through that lens it becomes much more understandable. Then again the suffragettes were very much of the landed gentry class and their focus followed that. Still even though they were mostly of that class they at least looked beyond it far more than current "feminists".

El_Duderino 09 · 21-06-2018 10:44am

Wibbs wrote: »

or the dirtier, less "middle class" jobs that are majority male. In essence "Equality" when it suits.

As I've said before "feminism" has become very much a suburban white middle class politic, hence much of its focus. If you filter it through that lens it becomes much more understandable. Then again the suffragettes were very much of the landed gentry class and their focus followed that. Still even though they were mostly of that class they at least looked beyond it far more than current "feminists".

One of the main arguments of the repeal campaign was that women who can afford to travel to Britain for an abortion can already get an abortion.

Legislating for abortion in Ireland would mean that poor women could also have an abortion. .

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 11:27am

Wibbs wrote: »

.. or the dirtier, less "middle class" jobs that are majority male. In essence "Equality" when it suits.

As I've said before "feminism" has become very much a suburban white middle class politic, hence much of its focus. If you filter it through that lens it becomes much more understandable. Then again the suffragettes were very much of the landed gentry class and their focus followed that. Still even though they were mostly of that class they at least looked beyond it far more than current "feminists".

Agreed, there's "Women in Surgery". "Women in Business" etc, where is the outrage about women being under-represented in the fields of refuse collection, grave digging and deep sea fishing ?

El_Duderino 09 · 21-06-2018 11:38am

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Agreed, there's "Women in Surgery". "Women in Business" etc, where is the outrage about women being under-represented in the fields of refuse collection, grave digging and deep sea fishing ?

Would you be happier if they started campaigning to get more women into jobs where they’re under represented? If you saw them successfully lobby to get more women into grave digging, refuse collection and deep sea fishing, would you wipe your brow and say ‘phew. I’m glad that hypocrisy is over’?

Somehow I doubt it.

There are plenty of men’s business groups. The presidents club was running for years as an all Male event. Until they ballsed it up by sexually assaulting the staff. Or maybe o should say the staff ballsed it up by exposing that they were sexually assaulted.

Rory28 · 21-06-2018 11:40am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

There are plenty of men’s business groups. The presidents club was running for years as an all Male event. Until they ballsed it up by sexually assaulting the staff. Or maybe o should say the staff ballsed it up by exposing that they were sexually assaulted.

Lets not drag that mess back up. It will only get messy.

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 11:44am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Would you be happier if they started campaigning to get more women into jobs where they’re under represented? If you saw them successfully lobby to get more women into grave digging, refuse collection and deep sea fishing, would you wipe your brow and say ‘phew. I’m glad that hypocrisy is over’?

Somehow I doubt it.

There are plenty of men’s business groups. The presidents club was running for years as an all Male event. Until they ballsed it up by sexually assaulting the staff. Or maybe o should say the staff ballsed it up by exposing that they were sexually assaulted.

No, because for feminists the hypocrisy will never be over. Too many people have a good living from the fake idea of gender inequality and will not give up that gravy train any time soon.

There are failures who instead of owning up, working harder and succeeding play the victim and blame the non-existent "patriarchy". E.g. why does the woman next to me earn 7,000 less ? Because I've been doing it for 29 years and she's had four spells out to have children, each 2 years minimum. (I'm female btw if it matters).

And the Presidents Club debacle ? You phrased that wrong.

It should have been "feminists have changed what sexual assault means so that where it was a shorthand for assault short of penetration, it's now anything untowards".

Basically what girls in my teenage years (late 80s) would have been met with a slap and a warning not to get fresh, is now met with victimhood, lawsuits and hashtags. As a woman that's not progress to me.

21-06-2018 12:18pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Would you be happier if they started campaigning to get more women into jobs where they’re under represented? If you saw them successfully lobby to get more women into grave digging, refuse collection and deep sea fishing, would you wipe your brow and say ‘phew. I’m glad that hypocrisy is over’?

Somehow I doubt it.

Actually, I would. It would be nice to see some movement towards genuine equality, since women's groups have made such a big deal about the % of a gender in a job or industry.

There are plenty of men’s business groups. The presidents club was running for years as an all Male event. Until they ballsed it up by sexually assaulting the staff. Or maybe o should say the staff ballsed it up by exposing that they were sexually assaulted.

Yup, there are plenty of men's only groups, up until the point, that a woman complains about it. Then, declarations of discrimination, and misrepresentation abound. Whereas when it comes to female only groups, there are plenty of justifications as to why women need a safe place to congregate. The numbers of gender only groups around is heavily leaning towards female-only.

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 12:23pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually, I would. It would be nice to see some movement towards genuine equality, since women's groups have made such a big deal about the % of a gender in a job or industry.

Yup, there are plenty of men's only groups, up until the point, that a woman complains about it. Then, declarations of discrimination, and misrepresentation abound. Whereas when it comes to female only groups, there are plenty of justifications as to why women need a safe place to congregate. The numbers of gender only groups around is heavily leaning towards female-only.

Once told that women need a women only environment so they are not physically judged by men.

Several women I know have referred to both Beyonce and Kim Kardashian as "fat".

The men are either "who ?" or drooling!!

There's judgement about women's bodies alright but it's rarely coming from men.

21-06-2018 12:40pm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Once told that women need a women only environment so they are not physically judged by men.

Several women I know have referred to both Beyonce and Kim Kardashian as "fat".

The men are either "who ?" or drooling!!

There's judgement about women's bodies alright but it's rarely coming from men.

Oh, I'd guess plenty of men make remarks about a woman's body... but really? Are we so insecure that we can't simply deal with it?

I've had people from both genders remark on my extreme skinniness. my shaking disorder,my bad teeth, etc. There doesn't seem to be any inhibition against judging and passing on observations about men. What do you do? Realise that most peoples observations aren't worth the air they're using and move on with your life. The numbers of people you meet with valid and worthwhile opinions could be listed on a single page.

We really are encouraging a society of people who are weak against everything, unable to deal with "negative" observations or competition. It boggles the mind.

El_Duderino 09 · 21-06-2018 12:58pm

Deleted User wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Would you be happier if they started campaigning to get more women into jobs where they’re under represented? If you saw them successfully lobby to get more women into grave digging, refuse collection and deep sea fishing, would you wipe your brow and say ‘phew. I’m glad that hypocrisy is over’?

Somehow I doubt it.

Actually, I would. It would be nice to see some movement towards genuine equality, since women's groups have made such a big deal about the % of a gender in a job or industry.

There are plenty of men’s business groups. The presidents club was running for years as an all Male event. Until they ballsed it up by sexually assaulting the staff. Or maybe o should say the staff ballsed it up by exposing that they were sexually assaulted.

Yup, there are plenty of men's only groups, up until the point, that a woman complains about it. Then, declarations of discrimination, and misrepresentation abound. Whereas when it comes to female only groups, there are plenty of justifications as to why women need a safe place to congregate. The numbers of gender only groups around is heavily leaning towards female-only.

Ha. I don’t believe for a second that you’d be happier if feminists pushed for more women in s broader range of jobs. They’re good at getting gender quotas etc. enacted. Careful what you wish for.

I really hint think the presidents club event was ended because women complained that it was men only. I can safely say I’ve never heard of the presidents club until the last one so I wouldn’t have heard any objections to it either.

Even if there were objections to it in previous years,it hadn’t stopped it from going ahead. It was the accusations of sexual assault that that finished it, not the fact that it was an all male event

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 1:04pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ha. I don’t believe for a second that you’d be happier if feminists pushed for more women in s broader range of jobs. They’re good at getting gender quotas etc. enacted. Careful what you wish for.

I really hint think the presidents club event was ended because women complained that it was men only. I can safely say I’ve never heard of the presidents club until the last one so I wouldn’t have heard any objections to it either.

Even if there were objections to it in previous years,it hadn’t stopped it from going ahead. It was the accusations of sexual assault that that finished it, not the fact that it was an all male event

A phrase you won't be able to us within a decade I'd say unless it's in a prison. You know cos women shouldn't be locked up, poor chickens.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/01/why-we-should-close-womens-prisons-and-treat-their-crimes-more-fairly

"Fairly" - hahahaha!

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 1:08pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh, I'd guess plenty of men make remarks about a woman's body... but really? Are we so insecure that we can't simply deal with it?

I've had people from both genders remark on my extreme skinniness. my shaking disorder,my bad teeth, etc. There doesn't seem to be any inhibition against judging and passing on observations about men. What do you do? Realise that most peoples observations aren't worth the air they're using and move on with your life. The numbers of people you meet with valid and worthwhile opinions could be listed on a single page.

We really are encouraging a society of people who are weak against everything, unable to deal with "negative" observations or competition. It boggles the mind.

True. In the 60s my mother (then aged 26) was in London and someone grabbed her backside.

She turned round, decked him one (no girly slap thank you!) and went on with her day.

Women these days would be straight on Twitter hashtagging away and claiming to be a sexual assault survivor.

I do not mean to make light of suffering but children committing suicide due to name caling ? You should have heard some of the things I was called in school.

Did the teachers help ? No, sometimes the nuns joined in! #evil

Result ? At 48 I am now well adjusted, able to cope with most day to day issues. I doubt that in 30 years or so we'll be able to say that about today's teenagers. Sadly.

21-06-2018 1:21pm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

True. In the 60s my mother (then aged 26) was in London and someone grabbed her backside.

She turned round, decked him one (no girly slap thank you!) and went on with her day.

Women these days would be straight on Twitter hashtagging away and claiming to be a sexual assault survivor.

My mother talked about the time she spent dating before being with my father. She's very honest about her experiences. She knew what would happen if she went anywhere with a guy in a car. She was taught to be careful around men, not because they were evil, but simply because men wanted sex. And she lived her life that way. So, she didn't spend time with men she didn't know, she made sure she had other friends nearby, she didn't drink too much with strangers. In other words, she took precautions.

I do not mean to make light of suffering but children committing suicide due to name caling ? You should have heard some of the things I was called in school.

Did the teachers help ? No, sometimes the nuns joined in! #evil

Result ? At 48 I am now well adjusted, able to cope with most day to day issues. I doubt that in 30 years or so we'll be able to say that about today's teenagers. Sadly.

I was bullied physically and mentally in both primary and secondary school. It was relentless. And I tried to kill myself twice. I don't underestimate the harm that emotional attacks can make on a child. It's evil, and frankly, I'm not surprised that children seek escape.

However, it's not anything new. In spite of psychologists or parenting associations trying to make it sound like it's gotten worse, it's simply evolved. Social media gives an extra dimension to it. But then, without the internet, also provided its own harsher dimensions that many children don't have to experience today.

Honestly, I would place more blame on changing social values and a decrease in traditional parenting as being more of an issue. I had a curfew at 9pm every school day. My parents always knew where I was right up until I was 16. If they couldn't be there to respond, other parents were nominated. There was a community of people willing to spend that extra time to watch the children. As a child and teen it was invasive and horrible, but I can certainly see the lack of it today.

El_Duderino 09 · 21-06-2018 1:53pm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

A phrase you won't be able to us within a decade I'd say unless it's in a prison. You know cos women shouldn't be locked up, poor chickens.

Won’t be able to say ‘all Male event’ within a decade? That sounds a bit... unhinged, tbh.

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 1:53pm

Deleted User wrote: »

My mother talked about the time she spent dating before being with my father. She's very honest about her experiences. She knew what would happen if she went anywhere with a guy in a car. She was taught to be careful around men, not because they were evil, but simply because men wanted sex. And she lived her life that way. So, she didn't spend time with men she didn't know, she made sure she had other friends nearby, she didn't drink too much with strangers. In other words, she took precautions.

I was bullied physically and mentally in both primary and secondary school. It was relentless. And I tried to kill myself twice. I don't underestimate the harm that emotional attacks can make on a child. It's evil, and frankly, I'm not surprised that children seek escape.

However, it's not anything new. In spite of psychologists or parenting associations trying to make it sound like it's gotten worse, it's simply evolved. Social media gives an extra dimension to it. But then, without the internet, also provided its own harsher dimensions that many children don't have to experience today.

Honestly, I would place more blame on changing social values and a decrease in traditional parenting as being more of an issue. I had a curfew at 9pm every school day. My parents always knew where I was right up until I was 16. If they couldn't be there to respond, other parents were nominated. There was a community of people willing to spend that extra time to watch the children. As a child and teen it was invasive and horrible, but I can certainly see the lack of it today.

Jesus, the sheer relief at 4pm, or weekends or BLISS - summer!

I developed a serious phobia of the That's Life themetune as a kid because it signified end of Sunday and bed time.

Imagine having to deal with them online ??? I would crack up.

21-06-2018 2:11pm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Jesus, the sheer relief at 4pm, or weekends or BLISS - summer!

I developed a serious phobia of the That's Life themetune as a kid because it signified end of Sunday and bed time.

Imagine having to deal with them online ??? I would crack up.

I'm from a midlands town. Summer didn't stop anything. When I was young, you knew everyone and everyone knew you. The population of my hometown hasn't increased much although there are plenty of new faces now, but that sense of being observed is pretty much gone now.

I'll give an example. I lost my virginity in the woods behind my school, and someone saw us. When I arrived home that day, my parents were sitting at the kitchen table with a large box of condoms along with a speech on personal responsibility. Not the basic birds and bees story but an introduction into STDs and how my life would be ruined by an unplanned pregnancy. They didn't ask me not to have sex again.. they simply asked me to "man up". Take responsibility.

PlaneSpeeking · 21-06-2018 2:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm from a midlands town. Summer didn't stop anything. When I was young, you knew everyone and everyone knew you. The population of my hometown hasn't increased much although there are plenty of new faces now, but that sense of being observed is pretty much gone now.

I'll give an example. I lost my virginity in the woods behind my school, and someone saw us. When I arrived home that day, my parents were sitting at the kitchen table with a large box of condoms along with a speech on personal responsibility. Not the basic birds and bees story but an introduction into STDs and how my life would be ruined by an unplanned pregnancy. They didn't ask me not to have sex again.. they simply asked me to "man up". Take responsibility.

I grew up in the NW UK and whilst you'd see the bullies, they could be ignored a lot of the time. Did see one whilst swimming who thought it was funny to push me in, my dad saw her and threatened to drown her!

Your parents sound amazing btw - absolutely the right way to deal there!!

iptba · 21-06-2018 10:38pm

iptba wrote: »

Maybe not a clear-cut example of anything except it sounds like women may be chosen over men next year.

A lot less important than when full-time jobs are given out but the same forces may apply.

If that's one of the topics, I would expect more male than female experts though I am no expert on the topic.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/macgill-summer-school-director-apologises-for-gender-imbalance-1.3537147

I saw this was trending today #InspireFest
They make a big issue about being "diverse" and supporting females.

https://twitter.com/lizadonnelly/status/1009737809652015104
https://twitter.com/raju/status/1009741654918684673
https://twitter.com/WWCodeBelfast/status/1009814573195628545

PlaneSpeeking · 22-06-2018 9:02am

So, is a "balanced panel" now going to be - woman, black woman, Aisan woman, gay woman, transwoman and token man (preferably F-M trans) ????

lawred2 · 22-06-2018 9:07am

Middle Man wrote: »

The issue of misandry among frontline feminists.

is this an issue?

an issue for whom?

PlaneSpeeking · 22-06-2018 9:16am

lawred2 wrote: »

is this an issue?

an issue for whom?

The rest of us women for one - we are thankful for the changes in attitudes, laws etc - we have the ability, possibilities and opportunities to achieve EVERYTHING men can.

Are some women willing to make sacrifices ? No.

Are some women happy to play the victim and blame the non-existent patriarchy ? Yes.

Are there women see men as the enemy and who do not want equality but want to have special treatment and advantages afforded only to them and not to men ? Damn straight.

There's the misandry right there.

lawred2 · 22-06-2018 9:17am

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

The rest of us women for one - we are thankful for the changes in attitudes, laws etc - we have the ability, possibilities and opportunities to achieve EVERYTHING men can.

Are some women willing to make sacrifices ? No.

Are some women happy to play the victim and blame the non-existent patriarchy ? Yes.

Are there women see men as the enemy and who do not want equality but want to have special treatment and advantages afforded only to them and not to men ? Damn straight.

There's the misandry right there.

but sure people the world over have their issues - just let them at it

I still don't see how it's a problem for me

PlaneSpeeking · 22-06-2018 9:23am

lawred2 wrote: »

but sure people the world over have their issues - just let them at it

I still don't see how it's a problem for me

Well, personally speaking I was told just last year that as a woman I shouldn't care about gay rights.

A friend was marrying someone from a country that does not yet have equal marriage. I said it was wrong that they are legally married here but not in the other country. Married is married.

In fact, being gay can be a criminal offence in a neighbouring country I believe.

"Who cares ? How is that helping our cause ?"

Told her it was helping equality. "Snort.. (well she snorted but you get my drift!).. and that stops sexual violence towards women how ?"

I need a new job. Bitches be cray cray.

lawred2 · 22-06-2018 9:29am

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Well, personally speaking I was told just last year that as a woman I shouldn't care about gay rights.

A friend was marrying someone from a country that does not yet have equal marriage. I said it was wrong that they are legally married here but not in the other country. Married is married.

In fact, being gay can be a criminal offence in a neighbouring country I believe.

"Who cares ? How is that helping our cause ?"

Told her it was helping equality. "Snort.. (well she snorted but you get my drift!).. and that stops sexual violence towards women how ?"

I need a new job. Bitches be cray cray.

Is she not concerned about her gay sisters?

either way she's clearly unhinged - so I wouldn't get too upset

PlaneSpeeking · 22-06-2018 9:31am

lawred2 wrote: »

Is she not concerned about her gay sisters?

either way she's clearly unhinged - so I wouldn't get too upset

Oh I can care about lesbians - but not gay men apparently!!!!

Cheers for that, she is unhinged!

iptba · 23-06-2018 8:21pm

Was just listening to the TED radio hour on Newstalk. They played excerpts of a TED talk by someone who called herself a “bad feminist” because she didn’t always stick to some things feminists espouse e.g. listens to rap, likes men to do certain types of work (e.g. mow the lawn, put out the trash).

Anyway her main job is as an English lecturer. She was making a point about identity and how everyone has an interesting story to tell and how she tells everyone to write about what they know, in the creative writing class, except white men. It was jarring the way she added that. An odd world where you can basically brag about being prejudiced. No tough questions from interviewer.

iptba · 25-06-2018 5:41pm

https://twitter.com/WCDC2018/status/1011188792894656513
This is the Mary Robinson who was previously our president.

"Man" is ambiguous here.
But if the claim is that men cause environmental problems, it has occurred to me that women may be a bigger cause of clothes pollution which from what I hear is a significant environmental issue.

25-06-2018 5:58pm

iptba wrote: »

This is the Mary Robinson who was previously our president.

"Man" is ambiguous here.
But if the claim is that men cause environmental problems, it has occurred to me that women may be a bigger cause of clothes pollution which from what I hear is a significant environmental issue.

It's more of the usual cop out like as if women had no control/influence or involvement in world affairs before gaining their rights, and even then, they'll find a reason to avoid responsibility.

And no, I wouldn't see "man" as being ambiguous. The media has made enough of a fuss about the distinction between man and woman for the last two decades, for anyone trained in media releases to be that generic. Nah. Don't buy it. She's playing to the gender crowd.

silverharp · 25-06-2018 6:16pm

well if science was turned over to feminists the global economy would crash fairly quickly so it might be a plan

Eric Cartman · 25-06-2018 8:54pm

the only reason websites / conferences /services are pandering to becoming a hub and a space for women is that they are pandering to advertisers who figured out women are more likely to click ads and also are responsible for most consumer spending.

when you find a company/website being 'female oriented' 'pro woman' or 'inclusive' you can bet your ass it's funded by advertising or trying to sell consumer goods that are form over function / promotional.

El_Duderino 09 · 26-06-2018 3:08pm

Deleted User wrote: »

iptba wrote: »

This is the Mary Robinson who was previously our president.

"Man" is ambiguous here.
But if the claim is that men cause environmental problems, it has occurred to me that women may be a bigger cause of clothes pollution which from what I hear is a significant environmental issue.

And no, I wouldn't see "man" as being ambiguous. The media has made enough of a fuss about the distinction between man and woman for the last two decades, for anyone trained in media releases to be that generic. Nah. Don't buy it. She's playing to the gender crowd.

That's a big media issue to the few people like yourselves who are mired in gender politics. Everyone else would know exactly what is meant by 'manmade' 'mankind' huMAN' 'HIStory'.

I always saw Mary Robinson as a fairly straight forward person. The idea that she's using a speech on climate change to simultaneously blame the whole problem on men is silly. But it does show how some people can get bogged down in all this gender stuff. You seem to see it everywhere.

iptba · 26-06-2018 4:25pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I always saw Mary Robinson as a fairly straight forward person. The idea that she's using a speech on climate change to simultaneously blame the whole problem on men is silly. But it does show how some people can get bogged down in all this gender stuff. You seem to see it everywhere.

Just a reminder to anyone who missed it that it was Mary Robinson in the quote who said “Climate-change ... needs a feminist solution”

Eric Cartman · 26-06-2018 4:49pm

iptba wrote: »

Just a reminder to anyone who missed it that it was Mary Robinson in the quote who said “Climate-change ... needs a feminist solution”

What , just sull at the iceberg till it asks what it did wrong by melting ?

H3llR4iser · 27-06-2018 12:59pm

Months ago, I posted in a different thread that the impact of this was more or less zero in the "real world", outside of the venomous confines of the Internet.

A couple recent episodes I recently witnessed, including a couple of ladies at work nonchalantly stating that "men shouldn't have been allowed to vote" in the abortion referendum, tell me this is unfortunately changing for the worse.

27-06-2018 1:46pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Months ago, I posted in a different thread that the impact of this was more or less zero in the "real world", outside of the venomous confines of the Internet.

A couple recent episodes I recently witnessed, including a couple of ladies at work nonchalantly stating that "men shouldn't have been allowed to vote" in the abortion referendum, tell me this is unfortunately changing for the worse.

Pretty much. With Social media, and the ease in which people use their phones to access the internet, there is no clear division between the internet and the RL. All of these discussions, messages, etc are spilling over into the RL and being commented on by people. It probably doesn't help that mainstream media is so interested in encouraging such ideas with their "opinion" pieces.

Oh, Ireland is still far behind, in terms, of "normal" people with these viewpoints, but it's really common to encounter these attitudes abroad both in Europe and beyond.

H3llR4iser · 27-06-2018 2:12pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Pretty much. With Social media, and the ease in which people use their phones to access the internet, there is no clear division between the internet and the RL. All of these discussions, messages, etc are spilling over into the RL and being commented on by people. It probably doesn't help that mainstream media is so interested in encouraging such ideas with their "opinion" pieces.

Going a bit off topic, this is becoming a bigger and bigger issue in many situations as people unquestioningly accept what comes from established medium, think what they're told to think and believe what they're told to believe. This was already a problem when the "established mediums" were made of professional news outlets with obligations and a code of conduct to respect, now that any number of "village idiots" can shout their views to a vast audience...society is in a pile of poop.

I've made a mental note to myself to never, ever engage in "live" discussions about controversial public topics, as it's a complete dead end and a recipe for utter disaster - no matter how researched, documented and elaborate your argument is, you're against the "well, TV/Internet says it is that way, so you shut up!" attitude.

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh, Ireland is still far behind, in terms, of "normal" people with these viewpoints, but it's really common to encounter these attitudes abroad both in Europe and beyond.

Good point - I've posted this as well, about a year ago I stumbled on one of these "Day against domestic violence" threads on a friend's Facebook page. All well and good, until somebody replied to her that "domestic violence" is not exclusively perpetrated by men on women...to which she replied "Men who get beaten by women have no balls and deserve it, probaly they enjoy it!". The reply had quite a few likes to it too. Yay.

PlaneSpeeking · 27-06-2018 2:32pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Going a bit off topic, this is becoming a bigger and bigger issue in many situations as people unquestioningly accept what comes from established medium, think what they're told to think and believe what they're told to believe. This was already a problem when the "established mediums" were made of professional news outlets with obligations and a code of conduct to respect, now that any number of "village idiots" can shout their views to a vast audience...society is in a pile of poop.

I've made a mental note to myself to never, ever engage in "live" discussions about controversial public topics, as it's a complete dead end and a recipe for utter disaster - no matter how researched, documented and elaborate your argument is, you're against the "well, TV/Internet says it is that way, so you shut up!" attitude.

Good point - I've posted this as well, about a year ago I stumbled on one of these "Day against domestic violence" threads on a friend's Facebook page. All well and good, until somebody replied to her that "domestic violence" is not exclusively perpetrated by men on women...to which she replied "Men who get beaten by women have no balls and deserve it, probaly they enjoy it!". The reply had quite a few likes to it too. Yay.

Does anyone recall a Coronation Street storyline where a woman (the ageing brain tells me she was in the police ?) was beating up her male partner.

Apparently the actor playing the victim said most of his online responses were from women accusing the storyline of "deflecting from real abuse".

Horrific.

El_Duderino 09 · 27-06-2018 2:56pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Months ago, I posted in a different thread that the impact of this was more or less zero in the "real world", outside of the venomous confines of the Internet.

A couple recent episodes I recently witnessed, including a couple of ladies at work nonchalantly stating that "men shouldn't have been allowed to vote" in the abortion referendum, tell me this is unfortunately changing for the worse.

Ah, I heard this type of thing too. I also heard people say the gay marriage referendum was nothing to do with them so they didn’t intend to vote.

I’m going to assume you didn’t actually say the obvious thing that I said to my parents in law about both the 8th amendment and gay marriage referenda. It’s not about whether you personally intend to have an abortion or marry a gay, it’s about the laws and rights I want people in my country to have.

Funny, when my parents in law said gay marriage was none of their business I didn’t assume that the gays were part of a conspiracy to take over. I assumed it was ignorance of the issue. And I’d assume your colleagues were similarly ignorant of the point if the referendum.

El_Duderino 09 · 27-06-2018 3:07pm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Does anyone recall a Coronation Street storyline where a woman (the ageing brain tells me she was in the police ?) was beating up her male partner.

Apparently the actor playing the victim said most of his online responses were from women accusing the storyline of "deflecting from real abuse".

Horrific.

Likewise I pointed out a story on Corrie where s man was drugged and raped which I thought was good because it highlighted the experience of a male rape victim.

But the reaction wasn’t positive, instead it focused on the fact that the perpetrator was Male implying that men are always the perpetrators. No matter how much you try to do good, some people will always try to see the good point to see the bad. It’s just the way some people are.

H3llR4iser · 27-06-2018 3:34pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah, I heard this type of thing too. I also heard people say the gay marriage referendum was nothing to do with them so they didn’t intend to vote.

I’m going to assume you didn’t actually say the obvious thing that I said to my parents in law about both the 8th amendment and gay marriage referenda. It’s not about whether you personally intend to have an abortion or marry a gay, it’s about the laws and rights I want people in my country to have.

I the specific case I investigated and the idea behind "men shouldn't be allowed to vote on abortion" was the belief that most would vote "NO", because they weren't "touched" by the subject matter, couldn't understand it, or maybe due to some dumb tribal hang-up about "spreading our genes". Because you know, you never heard of men who actually happen to have sisters, partners and female friends they care about, nor of ones who understand the difference between "rights" and "denying rights for my own sake".

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Funny, when my parents in law said gay marriage was none of their business I didn’t assume that the gays were part of a conspiracy to take over. I assumed it was ignorance of the issue. And I’d assume your colleagues were similarly ignorant of the point if the referendum.

There is no connection to the two situations - your parents in law expressed disinterest towards something they thought didn't touch them. While it IS an ignorant position as it's got potential do deny people of rights and opportunities just because someone couldn't be bothered taking their asses away from the TV for an hour, it was their own decision, right or wrong.

If on the other hand, if you had a gay person saying that "straight people shouldn't get to vote on this!", due to a wacky belief that non-gay individuals wouldn't understand the importance of the subject or just vote against due to spite or prejudice, it'd mean something completely different. It would essentially imply a victim complex ("they're against us"), a moral superiority complex ("we know what's right, they don't") and an assumption of lack of intelligence and insight ("they can't understand") bases SOLELY on sexual orientation - or, in the case I mentioned, on being born with a willy.

This IS discrimination in its purest form but still it isn't the crux of the issue, nor is any fantasy about "conspiracies". The real issue is that society is now conditioned to selectively fail to recognize discrimination based on which people or group(s) the end targets are.

El_Duderino 09 · 27-06-2018 4:25pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

I the specific case I investigated and the idea behind "men shouldn't be allowed to vote on abortion" was the belief that most would vote "NO", because they weren't "touched" by the subject matter, couldn't understand it, or maybe due to some dumb tribal hang-up about "spreading our genes". Because you know, you never heard of men who actually happen to have sisters, partners and female friends they care about, nor of ones who understand the difference between "rights" and "denying rights for my own sake".

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Funny, when my parents in law said gay marriage was none of their business I didn’t assume that the gays were part of a conspiracy to take over. I assumed it was ignorance of the issue. And I’d assume your colleagues were similarly ignorant of the point if the referendum.

There is no connection to the two situations - your parents in law expressed disinterest towards something they thought didn't touch them. While it IS an ignorant position as it's got potential do deny people of rights and opportunities just because someone couldn't be bothered taking their asses away from the TV for an hour, it was their own decision, right or wrong.

If on the other hand, if you had a gay person saying that "straight people shouldn't get to vote on this!", due to a wacky belief that non-gay individuals wouldn't understand the importance of the subject or just vote against due to spite or prejudice, it'd mean something completely different. It would essentially imply a victim complex ("they're against us"), a moral superiority complex ("we know what's right, they don't") and an assumption of lack of intelligence and insight ("they can't understand") bases SOLELY on sexual orientation - or, in the case I mentioned, on being born with a willy.

This IS discrimination in its purest form but still it isn't the crux of the issue, nor is any fantasy about "conspiracies". The real issue is that society is now conditioned to selectively fail to recognize discrimination based on which people or group(s) the end targets are.

Both things are the same to the extent that the solution is the same for both. Whether they thing men shouldn’t vote because they can’t have an abortion, or people think they shouldn’t vote because they’re not gay, the answer is the same.

Everyone is entitled to vote because it’s a question if the rules you want your country to have. Whatever way someone misinterprets that fact, that’s the salient point.

I often joke but at old people shouldn’t be allowed to vote when they get too old because they vote for retrograde policies. I don’t think it should actually be enacted because I know everyone has a right to vote whether I agree with them or not.

iptba · 12-07-2018 10:00pm

https://twitter.com/purplecat24/status/1017416408706060288

In case it's not clear, the ratio is 3:1. And this wouldn't be some traditionally heavily male-dominated field: it's about fundraising for charities

iptba · 12-07-2018 10:21pm

This was an ad in my twitter feed today:

https://twitter.com/theprogressives/status/798166646040985601?s=11

The Socialists and Democrats Group in the European Parliament works for social justice & equality for all EU citizens.

http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/new-meps

The S&Ds are proud to have 189 MEPs representing all 28 EU countries and (almost) equal numbers of men (55%) and women (45%).

We are still the second largest group in the European Parliament and our MEPs work in all parliamentary committees and international delegations. Find out more about your MEPs and which policy areas they're working on.

Irish representative:
CHILDERS Nessa

Wording like this by a mainstream group usually suggests feminism. I just thought it was a bit interesting that they would use this as their selling point.

givyjoe · 13-07-2018 9:39am

iptba wrote: »

https://twitter.com/purplecat24/status/1017416408706060288

In case it's not clear, the ratio is 3:1. And this wouldn't be some traditionally heavily male-dominated field: it's about fundraising for charities

I wonder would she be even more pleased if it was evenly balanced, i.e. 2:2. :rolleyes:

PlaneSpeeking · 13-07-2018 10:05am

givyjoe wrote: »

I wonder would she be even more pleased if it was evenly balanced, i.e. 2:2. :rolleyes:

I'm waiting for the backlash as the three women are white.

iptba · 14-07-2018 11:02pm

The dramatic improvement in women’s representation at the Gate Theatre is particularly striking. In just two years the proportion of female directors increased from 8 per cent in 2006-15, to 80 per cent in 2017-18, and writers increased from 6 per cent to 33 per cent , under its new artistic director Selina Cartmell.

Some adopted gender blind readings or casting, unconscious bias training for staff, gender equity on boards, 50 per cent of new play commissions for women writers, or a commitment to gender balance in programming within five years.

Yes we did: Irish theatre’s gender-equality revolution
Irish theatre came out blazing this week, proving that gender equality is ‘not hard to do, if you want to’

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/stage/yes-we-did-irish-theatre-s-gender-equality-revolution-1.3563784

The aim seems to be in some cases more to help women than gender equality per se.

If one wants to use percentages, which are a blunt measure, the denominator matters. For example, if two women apply for a position and one gets it, while 10 men apply for a position and one gets it, the outcomes may suggest equal results, but a smaller percentage of men who applied got the position than the percentage of women who applied.

How relevant to you is the controversy over feminism?

Comments