women's officer - should it be "equality officer"?

The_Minister

Apathy, apathy I say!

tintinr35 wrote:

ud think id know that after 3 years into a politics degree

I've only read the Prince and that was in fifth year:o

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

Prince is a great read. Still haven't read the Discourses... For shame...

The_Minister

Apathy, apathy I say!

anonymous_joe wrote:

Prince is a great read. Still haven't read the Discourses... For shame...

I know:( *shame*

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

What were they teaching us back there?

pretty*monster

Yes, equality officer would be better

DaveMcG wrote:

Pointless position, no need for bra-burning in this day and age..

*head explodes*

It's just this kind of nonsesne...

-breif her-story lesson-
There were never any bra-burners. That was a lie made up by a sensationalist male-dominated media to sell more papers and alienate even more men and women from the women's movement.

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

Really? Hmmm.

Do I care? No. Why? Because I don't judge people on gender. :rolleyes:

AngelofFire

Yes, equality officer would be better

Pointless position, no need for bra-burning in this day and age -- you don't need testicles to reach a high position of employment, power, or whatever, anymore.

Im a feminist and i dont advocate ''bra-burning''. As a Matter of fact I dont even have a bra to burn (im a bloke and cross dressing is just not my buzz). Women still are still descriminated against on the basis of their sexual organs 87% percent of Dail Eireann is made up of Male representatives and when last i checked men didnt make up 87% of the population. It also goes beyound the government i can probably count on one finger how many female CEOs we have in this country.

humbert

perhaps men are just better leaders:p

arbeitsscheuer

Yes, equality officer would be better

AngelofFire wrote:

Im a feminist and i dont advocate ''bra-burning''. As a Matter of fact I dont even have a bra to burn (im a bloke and cross dressing is just not my buzz). Women still are still descriminated against on the basis of their sexual organs 87% percent of Dail Eireann is made up of Male representatives and when last i checked men didnt make up 87% of the population. It also goes beyound the government i can probably count on one finger how many female CEOs we have in this country.

/applauds

Seriously ppl, just look at the fcuking statistics.

If you think women aren't discriminated against, then you're probably a) a man (and a misogynist at that) or b) a woman who clearly hasn't yet gone up against a bloke for a position of similar pay, responsibility and power.

seamus

Did you ever think that perhaps women don't want these positions? Do you expect to eventually see a 50-50 split in the Dáil?

When asked why nine out of ten of their pilots were male, one airline answered, "Women don't apply for the job".

In the interests of seeing if there's a backlog, I'd like to know the male:female split in some of the big debating societies in the big colleges. It's well known that many of these people go on to be politicians or successful businesspeople, so logically the split in these socities should give some reflection of what to expect in our elected officials.

Dave!

Apathy, apathy I say!

AngelofFire wrote:

87% percent of Dail Eireann is made up of Male representatives and when last i checked men didnt make up 87% of the population.

Are you trying to say that women should only vote for women in order to get the proportion right? Real democratic! Can a man not represent women and vice versa, in the Dáil?

And with regards the majority of TD's being male -- why do you think that is? Because us misogynistic pigs are only voting for males? Or is it something to do with the number of women running for election?

Let's look at the 2002 general election...

Cavan Monaghan - 1 woman
Carlow Kilkenny - 1 woman
Clare - 2 women
Cork East - 1 woman
Cork North Central - 1 woman
Donegal North East - 1 woman
Dublin Central - no women

and so on... look for yourself
http://electionsireland.org/results/general/29thdail/resultssummary.cfm

They can't be voted into power if they don't run, can they?! Same presumably goes for CEO's or what have you, seamus mentioned about the airline saying that women aren't going for the jobs, although I haven't noticed any shortage of women in power in the work-place, but hey what do I know!

pretty*monster wrote:

*head explodes*

It's just this kind of nonsesne...

-breif her-story lesson-
There were never any bra-burners. That was a lie made up by a sensationalist male-dominated media to sell more papers and alienate even more men and women from the women's movement.

Yes, it was a figure of speech.

John_C

Apathy, apathy I say!

My own opinion is that it should be changed. There are no women's issues that can't be dealy with just as well by an equality officer.

The_Minister

Apathy, apathy I say!

AngelofFire wrote:

Women still are still descriminated against on the basis of their sexual organs 87% percent of Dail Eireann is made up of Male representatives and when last i checked men didnt make up 87% of the population.

I'm sorry I forgot that I can't vote for women. Poor Mary Hanafin, she won't get my vote. Is it part of your manifesto to introduce gender-segregated voting?

pretty*monster

Yes, equality officer would be better

*sigh* that obviously isn't what Chris meant and if you have two brain cells to rub together (which you do) you know that's not what he meant.

Also, I'd like to think that you are all aware that a class (such as women) you do not need to be specifically denied need not be denied the right to sit in the Dail to find it more difficult than other groups to get elected (such as men).

Gender based steroetypes still abound. You see them blatantly every day. Women are still objectified in the media for example, which harms both men and women's perception of women.

tintinr35

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

*sigh* that obviously isn't what Chris meant and if you have two brain cells to rub together (which you do) you know that's not what he meant.

Also, I'd like to think that you are all aware that a class (such as women) you do not need to be specifically denied need not be denied the right to sit in the Dail to find it more difficult than other groups to get elected (such as men).

Gender based steroetypes still abound. You see them blatantly every day. Women are still objectified in the media for example, which harms both men and women's perception of women.

well in that case why would u not support the change to a gender equality officer or simply just a gender officer

pretty*monster

Yes, equality officer would be better

Well A) it smacks of namby-pamby pc noncence.

And I'm highly suspicios of the motives of those that want to see the Women's Office abolished. The idea that there are still 'women's issues' that haven't been solved is becaoming a taboo, even amoung those who claim that they're in favour of 'gender equality', it's a worrying trend I've noticed. There's an attept to convince everyone that feminism is OVER, and an implied assumption that if things aren't 50-50 then it's women's own damn fault, the subtext here, since things aren't 50-50, is that, yes, patriarchy was right all along, women are just bloody useless.

Changing the women's officer to a gender equality officer implies that men have just as many social disadvantages as women. The evidence suggests otherwise.
I'm interested to know what you'd like a gender equality officer to do for men.

tintinr35

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

Well A) it smacks of namby-pamby pc noncence.

And I'm highly suspicios of the motives of those that want to see the Women's Office abolished. The idea that there are still 'women's issues' that haven't been solved is becaoming a taboo, even amoung those who claim that they're in favour of 'gender equality', it's a worrying trend I've noticed. There's an attept to convince everyone that feminism is OVER, and an implied assumption that if things aren't 50-50 then it's women's own damn fault, the subtext here, since things aren't 50-50, is that, yes, patriarchy was right all along, women are just bloody useless.

Changing the women's officer to a gender equality officer implies that men have just as many social disadvantages as women. The evidence suggests otherwise.
I'm interested to know what you'd like a gender equality officer to do for men.

Well u are so enlightened on the topic so lets just say in a hypothetical situation u were running for women’s officer what would your manifesto include???
There is no sinister motive behind my DISCUSSION of the office; if you want equality then I believe it has to work both ways.
Maybe a if the office was encompassed to cover issues that directly relate to not only women but men as well, the combination might lead to a strengthening of the lobbying power of the welfare office in relation to such areas as the rising numbers of male suicide, the rising number of both males and females developing eating disorders. The Gender Equality Officer should be responsible for seeking to stop any form of discrimination against ANY student male/female in the college. Ucd is the only NUI that still has the position of women’s officer!!!

tintinr35

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

Well A) it smacks of namby-pamby pc noncence.


.

well what would you prefer other than being politcally correct, seems as if you would be complaining either way :rolleyes:

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

That I'm aware of, Dublin South East is only going to have one woman candidate at the next general election, FG's Lucinda Creighton, none of the other parties seem to be putting forward women candidates.

How can I vote for a woman if there isn't one to vote for.

At the Sabbat Elections, only one woman went for pres, and some of her rivals seemed better qualified (not that I bothered voting). Democracy is supposed to be in some ways meritocratic, I intend to vote in the best candidate to whatever, gender notwithstanding.

panda100

Apathy, apathy I say!

Well as you all know here Ive never been a fan of the womens officer position.I dont think it needs to be replaced by an equality or mens officer.I think it is a position that doesnt need to exist in the first place.Having either a womens officer or equality officer just furthers the gender divide between both sexes on our campus.

Of course there are problems alive in Ireland today that are specific to us women.Im not gonna roll out the statistics,
Its no laughing matter that only 3% of company executive is Europe are females.I'm fully aware that in my chosen profession as doctor panda I have seriously less opportunities than my male counterparts.However,this is an employment issue.Womens rights in the workplace should be promoted by the accomodation and employment officer as males need to be aware just as much as us women that there is serious gender inequalitys in the Irish work force.So why do we need a womens officer to further exageratte the gender gap when the accom and employment officer is fully capable of promoting workforce equality.

Then you talk of womens health issues.Of course there is health problems specific to women such as cervical cancer,smear testing,iron defficent anaemia and breast cancer(although this does affect males also). All these things should be promoted by the welfare officer.Good sexual health such as regular smears,sti checks using contraception etc should never be viewed as an exclusively female issue.These should be actively promoted by the welfare officer to make sure that both male and female are both aware of good sexual health. Gone are the days when it should just be males that carry condoms.Thus,going back to abortion,which always crops up in the topic of womens officer,this should be an issue that intrests both male and female students.It takes two to tango,and it takes two to make an embryo/baby/bunch of cells/whatever you want to call it.Having a womens officer makes abortion exclusively a womens issue and it should not be.It should be disscussed by both sexes equally. The wlefare officer pulls off a very successful 'Male health week' every year so why cant we have a womens health week also done by the trained welfare officer who will have more time to put into these serious issues.

The description that is written in the constitution for womens officer that pretty monster gave at the beggining of this thread shows just what a demeaning position this is to us girls.The womens officer is in charge of promoting personal saftey alarms to us girls??Do the union think just us fragile women get attacked??Do they really think ucd males students arent at risk of rape or attacks too?To say that just women need personal saftey alarms in this day and age,is just sexist.Male attacks now are just as common as female attacks.No one is safe walking around dublin in the wee hours by themselves without some sort of alarm or saftey device on them.

So apart from promoting saftey alarms the womens officer also organises a week of 'womens' events.So next year it'l be another week of pink butterfly posters full of self defence classes and speed dating.Because of course UCD males dont need self defence classes cos they're all so macho but us poor UCD girls do?You only have to see Blondie and Rainbow kirby to see girls can kick as much ass as boys.Promoting the fact that girls need self defence classes more than guys is just sexist.

The womens officer is sexist and not necessary at all.Why would any women want to be involved with this union when it doesnt treat us with any respect and just demeans us for the 'sexual organs' we have (as angel of fire so 'tactfully' wrote'.)

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

I've wandered drunk around UCD in the wee small hours a few times, by which I mean 3 or 4, and pretty out of it, and I must agree with Panda, anyone in that state of mind's at risk...

John_C

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

Changing the women's officer to a gender equality officer implies that men have just as many social disadvantages as women. The evidence suggests otherwise.

It implies that all incidents of discrimination should be treated equally, irrespective of the person or group being discriminated against.

Blush_01

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

Gender based steroetypes still abound. You see them blatantly every day. Women are still objectified in the media for example, which harms both men and women's perception of women.

Objectification is not a solely male-female thing. I have no problem with objectification - those people posing half-naked on the posters around the place, be they male or female, not only knew what they were doing but got well paid for it. I appreciate the female form as much as - if not more than - the male. And the objectification of our fellow human being is not solely confined to photographic images of the female form - men are objectified too. Sex sells, Pretty*Monster. It has since the dawn of time. It's not going to stop now. I'm pretty sure you're attributing far too much weight to the perceptions concieved by purely visual 2-D stimuli. Those people hanging on our walls, advertising our clothes, parading down catwalks, selling things to us in stores, promoting niteclubs on streets, handing out free samples... they're all essentially the same, the only thing that varies is their state of dress. And lets face it, you see more ass in the Arts Block than you do on posters these days. Maybe they're being negatively infulenced by the objectification of women and men in magazines, on posters, on TV and on the internet. Or maybe they feel sexy like that, like the way it gets them attention, like the way it makes them feel about themselves. People will always be sheep, people will always push barriers, and their self-image belongs to them themselves. You may not like how someone portrays him- or her-self. Maybe they don't like how you portray yourself either? Do you care about that? And if so, why?

The_Minister

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

*sigh* that obviously isn't what Chris meant and if you have two brain cells to rub together (which you do) you know that's not what he meant.

What I meant is that I will vote for who I want and whether they're hook or bait will not matter. Mary Harney and Mary Hannifen and Mary Coughlan are admired to varying degrees throughout Ireland. It is not like women are banned from power. Look at Síle de Valera, she got elected and she's minging.
I don't believe that people are choosing based on gender.

The_Minister

Apathy, apathy I say!

So men aren't discriminated against eh?

ozt9vdujny3srf

8.02am, and all's well.

Chinafoot

Firespinner wrote:

Look at Síle de Valera, she got elected and she's minging.
I don't believe that people are choosing based on gender.

What have her looks got to do with anything?

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

I thought she was always a bit of a political disaster, trading on her name. I've never respected her.

Stabshauptmann

Yes, equality officer would be better

The thing is that elections aren’t always representative. Not everyone has the same opportunities in life and for those who've used causality arguments - women don’t run that’s why they're not elected, that’s being short sighted.

The Dáil is by no means representative of the working class, not because few unemployed want the job, but because it takes a lot of money to run. Let’s skip over to the world’s greatest democracy and we see that it’s impossible to run without millions. If you are born into a disadvantaged area you're not going to be the next US president.

That’s the problem of one underrepresented class.

The barriers for women also go back to childhood. It’s enshrined in our minds that certain genders are better at performing certain tasks. If you look at the women who have succeeded in business and politics they are widely described as being very masculine or at least not particularly feminine.

As a people we stereotype that women don’t belong in positions of power. Children are starting to see more women in authority nowadays that they would 50 years ago. More gardaí and teachers. It was a very positive move to get rid of the term "ban gardaí" because it implied a difference in authority/capability.

From my experience only men are actively encouraged to play sports. It’s abnormal if they don’t. Sport provides much of the early leadership and teamwork skills needed in business and politics.

This practice of segregation by society of that is appropriate and expected from the different genders right up through life. The end result is less women in positions of power.

The Union didn’t have a post grad officer and some people felt making one was a mistake as it would give the impression the union didn’t already represent them. After talking to post grads, I agree with them that it didn’t. The ents office doesn’t do much for them. The accommodation office is irrelevant. Little campaigning was done for maintenance and research grants. In fact they were afraid the SU would start campaigning against the cut back in computer spaces in Daedalus and CS. Those spaces are being made into post grad offices.

Even though post grads have a vote, they are under-represented. Having their own officer gives them a voice. Even though women have the vote they are under represented.
Democracy wasn’t indented to make the strongest candidates our leaders per se, it was believed that if you give people the vote they will elect the people most representative of them. Democracy is very much like capitalism, the Darwinist principal of survival of the fittest doesn’t take account of inequalities in opportunity. Just as we in Europe have recognised market failures and taken steps to correct them artificially, the position of a women’s officer is a vital and worthwhile role within the SU.

anonymous_joe

Apathy, apathy I say!

Nice post. Well written. Still disagree...

I just find that even the wording of the position 'women's officer' is a tad archaic and anachronistic, reminders of a less egalitarian past. Perhaps a more 'positive' (ie, PC bullsh1tty) one would sound better.

Do women need an officer to safeguard their rights? Shouldn't everyone's rights be defended by one office, with the possibility of a number of individuals operating under the aegis of an 'Equality Office.'