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

iptba · 19-08-2016 7:55pm

On gender differences point, % of Honours A1s that are male:

IRISH: 27.99%
ENGLISH: 35.37%
FRENCH: 31.04%
GERMAN: 35.71%

MATHEMATICS: 71.29%

Cianmcliam · 20-08-2016 1:17am

Mark Hamill wrote: »

What's wrong with rationalised thought? What's wrong with getting people to actually justify what they believe? How can you achieve either without creative thinking and writing? Closemindedness and prejudice comes from people parroting things they learned young without being given the chance to examine opposite sides. Which is how the English course is taught - these plays, poetry and prose are great and you will learn how they are great and will tell us how they are great in the exams (and if you get the chance to be critical, then you will be critical in exactly this way). It's all mindless and preprepared.

Rationalised thought is different from rational thought. Rationalised thought is the pretence of using logic to arrive at a conclusion you wanted from the start. For example "I really would love an iPad Pro, but they are so expensive. But then again, if I charge it under the duvet I won't have to buy a water bottle and that will save me money I would have spent buying one and boiling water, so I might actually save money in the long run".

Nothing wrong with justifying your beliefs and rational argument but it's not all of life. What would most people think of a person who says 'I support Team X because they are doing great so far this year. Next year I'll wait and see who is doing best before choosing who to support'. People would prefer someone who admits they have no interest in sport rather than a calculating opportunist who has no sense of loyalty and common identity. Likewise, if someone asked you for five good reasons to justify being in a relationship with your partner you probably wouldn't appreciate it.

To be a rounded person you need to be able to see through the eyes of others, novels, poetry and plays are excellent practical exercises in this skill. Some people credit the humanitarian revolution of the last couple of centuries as being in large part due to printed works of fiction that allowed people to see through the human experiences of people other than those like themselves.

And being forced to read through century old plays and endure terrible poetry will make people empathise? How? You are not taught poetry and plays in school to really examine the implications of the story or even how a story can be used to make those implications. You are taught them so that you can either rattle off structural breakdowns in exams or give prepackaged responses to prepackaged opinions presented to you to agree or disagree with.

I think things have moved on since the rote learning of the 19th century. Modern teaching is not just about repeating or understanding a text but also interpreting it, teasing through the different perspectives and contrasting it with other works to get a sense of how different strategies used by writers can be more effective than others. How does the writer transfer their subtext into your mind etc. This is an extremely useful skill in seeing through propaganda for just one example.

You might find Shakespeare stuffy but it is an absolute masterclass in using exceptional levels of intentionality to build drama and get the brain working at maximum load ie. "I think that she knows that he believes his wife wants her father to hate the man that knows her secret". This is the kind of heavy lifting the brain doesn't have to do when you are just committed to the idea that you are right and they are wrong.

iptba · 20-08-2016 1:52am

Cianmcliam wrote: »

To be a rounded person you need to be able to see through the eyes of others, novels, poetry and plays are excellent practical exercises in this skill. Some people credit the humanitarian revolution of the last couple of centuries as being in large part due to printed works of fiction that allowed people to see through the human experiences of people other than those like themselves.

If one watches fiction on TV and/or in movies (which is pretty much everyone), one also gets to see things through other people's eyes.

Cianmcliam · 20-08-2016 2:02am

iptba wrote: »

If one watches fiction on TV and/or in movies (which is pretty much everyone), one also gets to see things through other people's eyes.

You do, but you are not encouraged to dwell on it, analyse what is happening or reconstruct the scenario in your own mind with people you might identify with more than the actors in front of you. It's not much different to observing what is happening in the street.

Writing draws out the emotions and inner thoughts of the characters, you would need stupid looking cloud bubbles over actors to achieve the same sense of actually being inside that persons head, with their thoughts and emotions. Some films have to employ a narrator to even approach that, but it is not the norm and people get tired of different narrators appearing through a film. That is why fiction, poetry and plays are so powerful.

Mark Hamill · 20-08-2016 12:51pm

Gbear wrote: »

Complete waste of time doing that.

If there's no reason to learn them people won't take them seriously.

There is no reason to learn them if you don't actually learn the language, which you wont do the way languages are thought in school. As you said later, total immersion is how it should be done, but if you add an exam at the end then the total immersion will fall apart in favour of just learning what you need to pass that exam.

Mark Hamill · 20-08-2016 1:37pm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

What? I never had that experience, and I got an A1 in English in my LC. I'd take what my teacher told me and see if I could argue it, many times me and him would have discussions over my essays I did for homework. I'd constantly get high B's, low A's vs my low B's, high C's for the actual essays because I could put my point across. Also, for poetry and text they ask a question you really can't prepare for, you need to know the themes and the play/poetry/texts very well to answer the question you get in the LC effectively, but you can still use your opinion and interpretation of things in the answer, as long as you can back it up from the quotes and themes.

I got it, not just in English but in Irish and Classical Studies too. In higher Irish we spent a few weeks being given essay, paragraph by paragraph, to learn off for regurgitation in the exam. In Classical Studies, my teacher suggested to me that I should take pass level, as I knew the material better than anyone but I couldn't give the answers they wanted as I disagreed with them (we had constant debates on Plato's Republic because I constantly disagreed with the text book about it).
I find the people who defend English so strongly are ones who did the best with it, which just strengthens the point that it's use and merit are entirely subjective. I loved and did very well in Maths, Chemistry and Physics, but I know that my own aptitude for them doesn't mean the courses were good, not when so many people struggle with even basic arithmetic and spotting clearly flawed science.

Gbear · 20-08-2016 1:50pm

Mark Hamill wrote: »

There is no reason to learn them if you don't actually learn the language, which you wont do the way languages are thought in school. As you said later, total immersion is how it should be done, but if you add an exam at the end then the total immersion will fall apart in favour of just learning what you need to pass that exam.

With unimportant exams like civics, religion and the like people are inclined to take them as doss classes. Even with those they're usually exam subjects so if you didn't even have that people would just take the piss during class time and nothing would get done.
My own experience is that lads are the worst for this sort of thing and I wouldn't have been much better myself.

There are serious benefits to learning languages. As far as I know they make you generally more intelligent, they make it easier to learn other langauges and I think they probably make you better at your own language as well.

I think there's scope for incorporating at least some element of linguistics into language courses - a shared curriculum that looks at how languages interact with one another. But in terms of a written component, other than expecting some techincal box ticking for basic written communication and a bit of reading comprehension, I see no reason why you wouldn't make the course 60/40 in favour of an oral exam.

Mark Hamill · 20-08-2016 1:59pm

Cianmcliam wrote: »

Rationalised thought is different from rational thought. Rationalised thought is the pretence of using logic to arrive at a conclusion you wanted from the start. For example "I really would love an iPad Pro, but they are so expensive. But then again, if I charge it under the duvet I won't have to buy a water bottle and that will save me money I would have spent buying one and boiling water, so I might actually save money in the long run".

Debate and discussion do not cause closemindedness and self-biased rationalisations (apologies for thinking you meant rational thought in general in the previous post), they are personal flaws people bring into debates and discussions because they think the ultimate point in them is to have themselves be proven right, rather then actually tease out which views are correct.
Just look at your argument in the second paragraph:

Cianmcliam wrote: »

Nothing wrong with justifying your beliefs and rational argument but it's not all of life. What would most people think of a person who says 'I support Team X because they are doing great so far this year. Next year I'll wait and see who is doing best before choosing who to support'. People would prefer someone who admits they have no interest in sport rather than a calculating opportunist who has no sense of loyalty and common identity. Likewise, if someone asked you for five good reasons to justify being in a relationship with your partner you probably wouldn't appreciate it.

Rational argument out the window in favour of consistent irrationality?
Don't discuss issues you don't like?
What happens if you apply that to something political voting or vaccinations or abortion? You are saying it is better for someone to constantly vote one political party despite that party becoming corrupt, because it's consistent. You are saying that someone should stay anti-vaccinations despite being presented all the evidence to the contrary, because it's consistent. You are saying people shouldn't even discuss abortion, because it's uncomfortable.
This is the sum of the English course? You don't get that irrationality from debate and discussion, you get that from a lack of debate and discussion, from the idea that being consistent is better than being able to change your mind, that ignoring issues you don't like makes them go away. Is it a co-incidence that this perfectly explains the political shambles this country is in?

Cianmcliam wrote: »

To be a rounded person you need to be able to see through the eyes of others, novels, poetry and plays are excellent practical exercises in this skill.

Have a look at Paper 2 Higher level english papers from the last 10 years, that is not what it is trying to do. You are given someone else's view and you have to agree/disagree with it. The course doesn't try to round you out as a person with stories from novel views, it de-constructs prose for mechanical dissection.

Cianmcliam wrote: »

I think things have moved on since the rote learning of the 19th century. Modern teaching is not just about repeating or understanding a text but also interpreting it, teasing through the different perspectives and contrasting it with other works to get a sense of how different strategies used by writers can be more effective than others. How does the writer transfer their subtext into your mind etc. This is an extremely useful skill in seeing through propaganda for just one example.

You might find Shakespeare stuffy but it is an absolute masterclass in using exceptional levels of intentionality to build drama and get the brain working at maximum load ie. "I think that she knows that he believes his wife wants her father to hate the man that knows her secret". This is the kind of heavy lifting the brain doesn't have to do when you are just committed to the idea that you are right and they are wrong.

If that was the case then everyone would get an honours A. Sure, how could you not, you are just asked to discuss your honest interpretation you got from your subconscious immersion of the themes present in the prose. Which is clearly BS, as many people struggle with the English course because the majority of the prose does not interest, never mind resonate with them. What do you do if you just find all the texts you are given dull and irrelevant? You are pretty screwed in the tests. The course doesn't round you out as a person, it expects you to fit in the narrow mould of appreciating that, for the most part, only a very small niche of the population otherwise appreciates.

Mark Hamill · 20-08-2016 2:07pm

Gbear wrote: »

With unimportant exams like civics, religion and the like people are inclined to take them as doss classes. Even with those they're usually exam subjects so if you didn't even have that people would just take the piss during class time and nothing would get done.
My own experience is that lads are the worst for this sort of thing and I wouldn't have been much better myself.

There are serious benefits to learning languages. As far as I know they make you generally more intelligent, they make it easier to learn other langauges and I think they probably make you better at your own language as well.

I think there's scope for incorporating at least some element of linguistics into language courses - a shared curriculum that looks at how languages interact with one another. But in terms of a written component, other than expecting some techincal box ticking for basic written communication and a bit of reading comprehension, I see no reason why you wouldn't make the course 60/40 in favour of an oral exam.

I'm not at all trying to say there shouldn't be languages in school, it's just that when you give the kind of structured tests we give in school, learning to speak the language fluently is put on the back burner in favour of learning the test, so to speak. An 60/40 exam in favour of oral would be a big improvement though, not to mention starting a European language in primary school.

Lemming · 20-08-2016 3:17pm

Coming back to the issue of multiple languages study favouring girls, from my recollections when applying for third level way back in the mid to late 1990s, UCD, and I believe Trinity too, required students to have at least two languages in order to be eligible for any course on offer. Irish was of course not counted, meaning that students typically ended up studying three languages just to satisfy the entrance requirements, never mind anything else like hons. maths, etc for certain courses.

matrim · 20-08-2016 3:31pm

Lemming wrote: »

Coming back to the issue of multiple languages study favouring girls, from my recollections when applying for third level way back in the mid to late 1990s, UCD, and I believe Trinity too, required students to have at least two languages in order to be eligible for any course on offer. Irish was of course not counted, meaning that students typically ended up studying three languages just to satisfy the entrance requirements, never mind anything else like hons. maths, etc for certain courses.

I thought that at least trinity used to count irish

Lemming · 20-08-2016 4:14pm

matrim wrote: »

I thought that at least trinity used to count irish

I don't think so. I seem to recall it was a general case of wanting to go to the big name institutions, then you needed an additional language. the requirement was for at least one 'foreign' language if I recall the small print.

matrim · 20-08-2016 4:38pm

Lemming wrote: »

I don't think so. I seem to recall it was a general case of wanting to go to the big name institutions, then you needed an additional language. the requirement was for at least one 'foreign' language if I recall the small print.

My recollection is that you normally needed Irish and a second "foreign" language everywhere except trinity, who only required one language and counted Irish towards that. But I could be wrong about the Trinity thing

mrkiscool2 · 20-08-2016 5:23pm

Lemming wrote: »

Coming back to the issue of multiple languages study favouring girls, from my recollections when applying for third level way back in the mid to late 1990s, UCD, and I believe Trinity too, required students to have at least two languages in order to be eligible for any course on offer. Irish was of course not counted, meaning that students typically ended up studying three languages just to satisfy the entrance requirements, never mind anything else like hons. maths, etc for certain courses.

Trinity counted Irish as a second language so you only needed English and Irish.

Lemming · 20-08-2016 6:43pm

I stand corrected! Wasn't quite sure on Trinity, so thanks for the clarification.

Regardless, so that we don't get distracted from my original point, it was my experience that most prospective students tended not to limit their hopes on one institution, thus the practical necessity for requiring a foreign language pushed by some of he larger institutions. Why exactly they chose to push it I cannot recall.

mrkiscool2 · 20-08-2016 9:53pm

Lemming wrote: »

I stand corrected! Wasn't quite sure on Trinity, so thanks for the clarification.

Regardless, so that we don't get distracted from my original point, it was my experience that most prospective students tended not to limit their hopes on one institution, thus the practical necessity for requiring a foreign language pushed by some of he larger institutions. Why exactly they chose to push it I cannot recall.

It is pretty insane. I'm in Maynooth and, even though I got in as a mature from a previous Science course in Galway, the people I came in with needed English, Irish, a foreign language, Maths and one science subject. That's 5 out of the 7/8 they do, which limits their choices to get better points.

matrim · 20-08-2016 10:06pm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

It is pretty insane. I'm in Maynooth and, even though I got in as a mature from a previous Science course in Galway, the people I came in with needed English, Irish, a foreign language, Maths and one science subject. That's 5 out of the 7/8 they do, which limits their choices to get better points.

3 of those 5 everyone had to do. And for the other two the competition for that course have to do the same.

It shouldn't be about doing the easy subjects to get the most points, it should be about getting the best base education for the course you want to do

mrkiscool2 · 20-08-2016 10:47pm

matrim wrote: »

3 of those 5 everyone had to do. And for the other two the competition for that course have to do the same.

It shouldn't be about doing the easy subjects to get the most points, it should be about getting the best base education for the course you want to do

Well when you are going for a subject like Medicine or Veterinary Medicine then it is a point race and not every person who gets into those courses is as suited for it as someone who may have missed out. Science is going that way too, pushing near the 500 point mark in some colleges which is insane and it then does become a points race. I only got a B3 in Chemistry in my LC but finished top of my class in both Galway and Maynooth in my first year because I have a good grasp of it.

matrim · 20-08-2016 11:56pm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Well when you are going for a subject like Medicine or Veterinary Medicine then it is a point race and not every person who gets into those courses is as suited for it as someone who may have missed out. Science is going that way too, pushing near the 500 point mark in some colleges which is insane and it then does become a points race. I only got a B3 in Chemistry in my LC but finished top of my class in both Galway and Maynooth in my first year because I have a good grasp of it.

IIRC medicine has introduced an interview to try make sure that people who are just off the points can still get in if they have an aptitude.

I'd be in favour of a limited use of something like that but it has to be limited (and open to scrutiny) because relying too much on interviews (or similar) and you re-introduce the favoritism that can happen, whether it is sexism, class-ism, or just plain old nepotism.

mrkiscool2 · 21-08-2016 5:23am

matrim wrote: »

IIRC medicine has introduced an interview to try make sure that people who are just off the points can still get in if they have an aptitude.

I'd be in favour of a limited use of something like that but it has to be limited (and open to scrutiny) because relying too much on interviews (or similar) and you re-introduce the favoritism that can happen, whether it is sexism, class-ism, or just plain old nepotism.

Yeah, the HPAT, but that has just meant that there are classes you can take to understand the HPAT exam and how to do better in it and prepare for it better. So, actually makes it better for students of rich people to get in and the LC points are worth a lot!

Lemming · 21-08-2016 9:00am

matrim wrote: »

IIRC medicine has introduced an interview to try make sure that people who are just off the points can still get in if they have an aptitude.

The RCSI has had that mechanism in place since at least the 1990s, probably before it too. I went through it. It's a good means of assessing the character of a possible candidate for a profession that not only involves am academic arms race to get in the door, but aptitude, personality, and a desire for the profession rather than "it seems a guaranteed job with lots of money".

The British UCAS/CAS application system also asked you to write a bit about yourself so the applicant institutions could look beyond simple academic numbers, albeit in a rudimentary fashion.

For all its merit, the CAO encourages a points grind and distills the L.C. down to a glorified memory recollection contest.

Carlos Orange · 23-08-2016 12:27am

No

"Of course all sexual offences are serious and the effects in the victim can be significant but in my submission there’s a significant difference to be made where it is the defendant who is penetrated and not the victim"

Not to be all law and order on it but maybe someone who abused a boy from the age of 6 should do a little jail time even if they are female and deaf.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1641064/paedophile-sisters-who-abused-a-boy-when-he-was-aged-just-six-have-been-spared-jail-because-theyre-both-deaf/

tritium · 23-08-2016 8:23am

psinno wrote: »

"Of course all sexual offences are serious and the effects in the victim can be significant but in my submission there’s a significant difference to be made where it is the defendant who is penetrated and not the victim"

Not to be all law and order on it but maybe someone who abused a boy from the age of 6 should do a little jail time even if they are female and deaf.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1641064/paedophile-sisters-who-abused-a-boy-when-he-was-aged-just-six-have-been-spared-jail-because-theyre-both-deaf/

Jesus thats disturbing and hard to read. Neither of them should be free for a very long time imho. I hope the severity if sentence can be appealed.

Oh and the defence barrister is a compmete dickhead on the basis of the comments he made.

Pawwed Rig · 23-08-2016 9:11am

So a paedophile is currently the guardian of a 3 year old boy???

How far down this rabbit hole must we go?

ancapailldorcha · 23-08-2016 9:13am

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

So a paedophile is currently the guardian of a 3 year old boy???

How far down this rabbit hole must we go?

It's not paedophilia. I believe the appropriate term is "affair".

py2006 · 23-08-2016 12:08pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's not paedophilia. I believe the appropriate term is "affair".

The amount of time I have read that word used in reference to female teachers who had sex with underage boys

mrkiscool2 · 23-08-2016 1:02pm

py2006 wrote: »

The amount of time I have read that word used in reference to female teachers who had sex with underage boys

It's vile. Not because of the double-standards or anything (though that sucks too) but it's because an adult, who knows better and is in a position of power, abuses a child in their care and they call it an affair. Makes it sound innocent when it really isn't. And it's not as if the victims think it's cool or anything, it damages them, you can hear it in their statements too.

23-08-2016 1:29pm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

It's vile. Not because of the double-standards or anything (though that sucks too) but it's because an adult

Actually, I think it's worse with the double standard because society almost gives allowance for older women to "educate" or take advantage of underage boys. There's an almost approval for a boy to be with an older woman. There's the sniggers that its cute or that she's educating him but if a man does the same, it's seen as something vile.

I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that there was any difference because of the older persons gender... and yet the way you wrote the above suggested to me that it was the lesser of two evils. If we wish to remove or seriously diminish this kind of behaior then we need to apply judgement equally.

mrkiscool2 · 23-08-2016 2:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually, I think it's worse with the double standard because society almost gives allowance for older women to "educate" or take advantage of underage boys. There's an almost approval for a boy to be with an older woman. There's the sniggers that its cute or that she's educating him but if a man does the same, it's seen as something vile.

I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that there was any difference because of the older persons gender... and yet the way you wrote the above suggested to me that it was the lesser of two evils. If we wish to remove or seriously diminish this kind of behaior then we need to apply judgement equally.

I think I wrote it well enough to say that anyone taking advantage of someone who is a child in their care (AKA a teacher) is awful and it shouldn't be called an affair, which only happens to male victims of female teachers, which is awful and vile.

alchemist33 · 26-08-2016 1:13pm

There's been some hilarity about this , a PSNI officer gives out a safety message around a concert and people, mostly women, keep commenting on how attractive he is. Indeed, it is a harmless story and I suspect the man involved is having a chuckle about it and getting a bit of stick at the station. But imagine if the roles were reversed and men were commenting online about how sexy the female police officer was. It'd be "internet pervs" here, and "sleazy trolls" there, and Guardian op-eds about how men just can't take women in authority roles.

Gbear · 26-08-2016 5:47pm

alchemist33 wrote: »

There's been some hilarity about this , a PSNI officer gives out a safety message around a concert and people, mostly women, keep commenting on how attractive he is. Indeed, it is a harmless story and I suspect the man involved is having a chuckle about it and getting a bit of stick at the station. But imagine if the roles were reversed and men were commenting online about how sexy the female police officer was. It'd be "internet pervs" here, and "sleazy trolls" there, and Guardian op-eds about how men just can't take women in authority roles.

I always find it tricky with these things.

Should you parrot the same message of feeling offended in order to expose people's hypocrisy about these issues but possibly run the risk of normalising the whinge as an appropriate response to them, or, should you just ignore it, treating it as being as far beneath contempt as it deserves to be, but by doing so risk leaving the platform on these issues to the whingers?

Feels like a lose-lose.

Pawwed Rig · 26-08-2016 5:59pm

That is a fair point but I think in these sitiations it is the double standard being highlighted rather than a whinge as such.

Pepe LeFrits · 26-08-2016 6:47pm

Wasn't there a similar story recently about two police officers (partners) going viral because of how good looking both of them were? I don't recall any outrage about that, and one of them was a woman.

source · 31-08-2016 7:26pm

No

http://www.linneadunne.com/2016/08/31/rest-in-peace-invisible-woman/

This article was shared by someone I know on Facebook.

Apparently it wasn't a mental health issue that caused the horrific deaths in Cavan but...get this...the patriarchy!!!

We hear about tragic killings like these every now and then. Nine times out of ten (I don’t have statistics, but my hunch is that the figure is far higher), the perpetrator is a man. Lots of people, men and women and non-binary people, struggle with mental illness, but it takes more than mental torture to brutally murder your own children. There is a patriarchal narrative that runs through this entire story, from the act itself to the reporting of it, and we need to allow ourselves to see it if we are to find a way to prevent similar events from happening again.[\Quote]

Lemming · 31-08-2016 7:38pm

source wrote: »

We hear about tragic killings like these every now and then. Nine times out of ten (I don’t have statistics, but my hunch is that the figure is far higher), the perpetrator is a man.

You'd be surprised at what you expect the numbers to be; there have been more than a few incidents over the past decade where the killer of family members has been the mother, ranging from wilfull neglect & abuse resulting in death to driving off peers with the kids strapped in. It's not a gender issue, it's a mental illness issue. And to be frank - anyone trying to turn an incident like this into a gender war debate can FOAD. Trying to dress an appalling tragedy like this up in gender-wars clothing serves nobody except the bank balances of the cynical few.

ancapailldorcha · 31-08-2016 7:40pm

maybe

Lemming wrote: »

Trying to dress an appalling tragedy like this up in gender-wars clothing serves nobody except the bank balances of the cynical few.

Yep. Ironic that she uses the term "Invisible woman" when I'd no idea her blog even existed.

cantdecide · 31-08-2016 8:37pm

source wrote: »

http://www.linneadunne.com/2016/08/31/rest-in-peace-invisible-woman/

This article was shared by someone I know on Facebook.

To quote St. Sarkeesian, "sexism sells". Or at least perceived sexism sells- we can all agree on that. The feminist establishment and their noisy supporters will always spin it round and round and round.

eviltwin · 31-08-2016 8:39pm

source wrote: »

http://www.linneadunne.com/2016/08/31/rest-in-peace-invisible-woman/

This article was shared by someone I know on Facebook.

Apparently it wasn't a mental health issue that caused the horrific deaths in Cavan but...get this...the patriarchy!!!

We hear about tragic killings like these every now and then. Nine times out of ten (I don’t have statistics, but my hunch is that the figure is far higher), the perpetrator is a man. Lots of people, men and women and non-binary people, struggle with mental illness, but it takes more than mental torture to brutally murder your own children. There is a patriarchal narrative that runs through this entire story, from the act itself to the reporting of it, and we need to allow ourselves to see it if we are to find a way to prevent similar events from happening again.

I've just read that blog, she's talking about the media reporting and the focus on the murders of the children.

source · 31-08-2016 8:59pm

No

eviltwin wrote: »

I've just read that blog, she's talking about the media reporting and the focus on the murders of the children.

Overall yes, however not in the paragraph I quoted, in that she gives us her opinion on the cause of such tragedies and in her opinion is patriarchy led.

Also the media will always focus on the loss of a child's life, whether they be male or female, over that of an adult. While any loss of life is tragic, the loss of a number of children in such a violent manner is going to get the focus of the media.

cantdecide · 31-08-2016 9:04pm

eviltwin wrote: »

source wrote: »

http://www.linneadunne.com/2016/08/31/rest-in-peace-invisible-woman/

This article was shared by someone I know on Facebook.

Apparently it wasn't a mental health issue that caused the horrific deaths in Cavan but...get this...the patriarchy!!!

I've just read that blog, she's talking about the media reporting and the focus on the murders of the children.

No, it's a ramble about the "patriarchy" and "abortion" cloaked as a comment on the media reporting which, she contends, should have been more focused on her character, life, her achievements, passions, family and generally should invade the privacy of her friends and family and anyone assoic... or something. She appears to be insinuating that society values women less... or something.

Pawwed Rig · 31-08-2016 9:08pm

Pretty disgusting to use an event like this to push an agenda just so people will read her little blog.

ancapailldorcha · 31-08-2016 9:55pm

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Pretty disgusting to use an event like this to push an agenda just so people will read her little blog.

That seems to be bloggers in general. Their narcissism will know few bounds while their blogs will know few readers.

Outlaw Pete · 31-08-2016 9:57pm

I know I should expect nothing less from FM104 but they're discussing men washing children who are in their care at the moment, and is it odd or not.

Even for FM104 some of the comments are disturbing. You'd swear there were no female pedophiles in the world. Crazy stuff.

One or two voices of reason though tbf.

http://www.fm104.ie/BoxTube/Default

mzungu · 31-08-2016 11:16pm

Lemming wrote: »

You'd be surprised at what you expect the numbers to be; there have been more than a few incidents over the past decade where the killer of family members has been the mother, ranging from wilfull neglect & abuse resulting in death to driving off peers with the kids strapped in. It's not a gender issue, it's a mental illness issue. And to be frank - anyone trying to turn an incident like this into a gender war debate can FOAD. Trying to dress an appalling tragedy like this up in gender-wars clothing serves nobody except the bank balances of the cynical few.

I wholeheartedly agree. Using a tragic event to try notch up some marks on the gender politics scoreboard is pretty low. It is quite obvious that author could not give a hoot about the family, they just become a convenient pawn until the next 'patriarchy' inspired rant.

Wibbs · 01-09-2016 8:50am

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Pretty disgusting to use an event like this to push an agenda just so people will read her little blog.

+1. More decaf latte feminist bullshít. Though to be fair, she does have a point wrapped up in her fauxtrage(c) re that specific case. The murdered mother has all but vanished from it, which TBH I found well odd myself.

Sleepy · 01-09-2016 9:20am

I'd guess it's because murdering one's spouse is a relatively "understandable" act: it's not unusual in the least in murder cases for the murderer to be the husband or wife of the victim (so much so, that they're usually the first suspect). Of course, such bloggers would cling to such stats as "proof of the inherent violence of the patriarchy" or some other BS (when the highest levels of partner abuse actually occur between lesbian couples) but it's far more to do with the depth of such relationships and the intensity of emotions when one of the parties feels betrayed by the other imo.

Murdering your own children goes so far against our own nature that it's utterly unfathomable to the vast majority of us. Hence, in a case like this, the media will focus on the boys rather than their mother. It's more sensational and will sell more papers.

Wibbs · 01-09-2016 10:00am

maybe

Granted S, but I'm just as surprised because the "man kills woman/mother of his kids" angle - which would go over with many in the chattering classes and play to the "woman is always a victim" crowd - is almost completely absent. I find it very odd.

kunst nugget · 01-09-2016 10:05am

maybe

Wibbs wrote: »

The murdered mother has all but vanished from it, which TBH I found well odd myself.

I don't think the airbrushing out of the mother from the story is really by design, tbh. I'd imagine the image of the father and his three children was probably the first image that the media found in their scramble to get an image of the family.

In terms of the reporting of the father as a well-liked member of the community? I'd imagine if the same thing happened in my area, it's probably one of the first things that would come out of my mouth if a reporter stuck a recorder in my face. Does it make it right? Probably not but I think you have to give the area the time to process what's just happened.

Also, the well-liked family man who was secretly a psychopath is probably a very easy way for the media to sell the story as it's pretty ghoulish and unnerving.

silverharp · 01-09-2016 10:09am

Wibbs wrote: »

Granted S, but I'm just as surprised because the "man kills woman/mother of his kids" angle - which would go over with many in the chattering classes and play to the "woman is always a victim" crowd - is almost completely absent. I find it very odd.

I must say I havnt read or seen any news about this apart from the initial report. if you think about the victims you cant get the kids out of your head so there is no space. if you think about the killer he wasn't someone you can contain in a box like Muslim , gangster or loner spree school killer.

py2006 · 01-09-2016 10:34am

Mental state of mind is often referred to when a woman commits murder. Articles often make you feel sympathetic towards her. 'He must have done something to make her murder him' kind of train of thought. I recall an article were a woman murdered her two babies and the focus was on the 'poor mother'.

Man does it and he is an out and out murdering scum. On the occasion that mental health is discussed it gets dismissed with venom.

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