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

Red Alert

Apathy, apathy I say!

well in that case i'm still paying for her not only to not-represent me but to actively campaign for a group which i cannot by choice be a member (or non member) of.

if the women of the college feel wronged they should set up FemSoc, and pay up for the women's officer's computer, website, pamphlets, protests etc.

Het-Field

Apathy, apathy I say!

Red Alert wrote:

well in that case i'm still paying for her not only to not-represent me but to actively campaign for a group which i cannot by choice be a member (or non member) of.

if the women of the college feel wronged they should set up FemSoc, and pay up for the women's officer's computer, website, pamphlets, protests etc.

Please dont encourage them to start up "Femsoc". For me it would just be like shooting fish in a barrel on Freshers week for me. I have various thing i need to look after on freshers week with one club, one political party, and one union, i dont have the time to stand at the femsoc table and laugh at them for having an obsolete and redundant society. While i dont totally agree with the position of WOmens Officer (id rather a gender equality officer), it ensures that while female interests can be looked after. Femsoc would make some kind of conglomerate of "femina*is" which is the last thing we want or need

Dave!

Apathy, apathy I say!

Het-Field wrote:

Femsoc

Please god no...

dajaffa

Personally I'm of the opinion that it should be renamed Gender Equality Officer. Calling it simply Equality officer makes the scope an awful lot wider, too big for a part-time unpaid officer.

Realisitically, by calling it women's officer, you're already creating an imbalance. There are a multitude of good points as to how far more men have the top positions in both UCD staff, and the SU officers.

But if you look at the voting for women's officer, there are a huge amount of RONs and spoils, which imo is due to it's title.

The last 2 successful candiates (could be more, I'm just past the fresher stage now), ran as gender equality officers really, because men have a vote, and it is a bit crazy to have men voting for someone who won't be representing them at all. If I was a man, and the women's officer candidates ran as pure womens officers, I'd probably spoil my vote tbh.

There are still a number of areas where men are on a lower footing than women. Like, why are there so few men doing nursing, and physio/radio to a lesser extent? Why do women seem to have an advantage in custody battles? Is it fair that a woman can have an abortion without even talking to the father about it?

Personally, I think there is a case to be made for having an Equality officer sabbat (not just gender issues, race, sexuality etc)...

(Ok I'll stop ranting now)

pretty*monster

Yes, equality officer would be better

Het-Field wrote:

Saying that i like Pretty Monster personally, so i wouldnt bracket her with Greer,PM is not that big a nut

I'm not sure if I should say thank you or just roll my eyes. I shall decide by September.

I am not an extremist. I grew up thinking that women were sorted and that total equality was just a matter of time. The kinds of oppinion expressed of thir thread convince me that this is not the case and that more work is needed and at the very least we need a higher level of public debate on the issues.

I'm half-tempted to do a happy-crack head (though better) blow out, but considering that I'm mostly just sick of getting personal abuse from Steph and others everytime I say something some one doesn't agree with (I'm more than happy for people to challenge my views and prove me wrong if it comes to it, but that's rarely what happens) I'm just going to abandon this forum.

See some of you in September.

Dave!

Apathy, apathy I say!

Cheerio

Het-Field

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

I'm not sure if I should say thank you or just roll my eyes. I shall decide by September.

I am not an extremist. I grew up thinking that women were sorted and that total equality was just a matter of time. The kinds of oppinion expressed of thir thread convince me that this is not the case and that more work is needed and at the very least we need a higher level of public debate on the issues.

I'm half-tempted to do a happy-crack head (though better) blow out, but considering that I'm mostly just sick of getting personal abuse from Steph and others everytime I say something some one doesn't agree with (I'm more than happy for people to challenge my views and prove me wrong if it comes to it, but that's rarely what happens) I'm just going to abandon this forum.

See some of you in September.

apologies, i meant to say "not a nut" as opposed to "not that big a nut" !
It was late and i was tired, and i really dont like Germaine Greer after her unfair treatment of Daniel O Donnell.

Chinafoot

pretty*monster wrote:

I'm mostly just sick of getting personal abuse from Steph and others everytime I say something some one doesn't agree with.

Roffle! You think thats personal abuse! *pets*

As Dave said...cheerio!

Red Alert

Apathy, apathy I say!

pretty*monster wrote:

I'm half-tempted to do a happy-crack head (though better) blow out, but considering that I'm mostly just sick of getting personal abuse from Steph and others everytime I say something some one doesn't agree with (I'm more than happy for people to challenge my views and prove me wrong if it comes to it, but that's rarely what happens) I'm just going to abandon this forum.

See some of you in September.

time to get started on femsoc so, adios

Pythia

/sheds a tear

ozt9vdujny3srf

Bye!

And seeing as noone else cares, locked