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

Calhoun

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Most likely not - the same way there are plenty of others who will duly ignore all the evidence and keep saying he's trying to "get away with it";

What I mean is that this should not be a game of "scoring points" and being elated that a "male feminist" gets swamped in the quagmire of a witch hunt that is "#metoo"; Sure enough, there's an undeniable component of schadenfreude in this - but the focus should be on the actions of the accuser and, even more so, on those of the absolute basket cases who jumped in on with completely outlandish claims.

Otherwise, it'll be too easy for the media to turn even this into a "rapist makes excuses, conservative angry white men rejoice" scenario. They can turn ANYTHING around, given a bit of leeway.

Prime example - Anthony Rapp has retracted his accusations to Kevin Spacey after a long back&forth where he basically refused to detail what happened to the court...but you need to go search deep to find the information.

I don't disagree with any of the above, however i don't go in for the "we must be whiter than white" or "holier than holier" when it comes to this stuff.

As i said i had a little schadenfreude but i don't think i was over the top in terms of "hes a male feminist so screw him". I still think that accuser is the person that the majority of disdain should be focused on and that its disgusting that she could get away with it so easily. If you think that i won't say lets slow down and point at another issue which is men also got themselves here you have another thing coming.

Allot of these idiots have ruined allot of men's lives, this particular idiot just happened to 1. have an audience he could reach and 2. be really competent in making content for youtube so he could articulately get his message across.

Each to their own, though. I'd rather have conversation about it than not say anything because im afraid i might not look like a goodboy.

JPF82

I listened to some of this on BBC radio 5 live. The female presenter did point out that she was stereotyping women as good and having no faults and asked her to point out faults of women.

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1160841956861157382?s=19

One eyed Jack

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The most acute are of Sexism faced by men these days is in the area of Parenting.

I have pretty strong views on this - as Parenting, for a lot of us, is the single most important thing we will do in life.

But we are routinely told by society and by women - that women are better parents - that they are closer to the kids, that they have a stronger bond with the kids and that they are the more important carer for the kids.

More importantly, the legal system also tells us this.

I have to disagree with you there. Objectively, the legal system does no such thing.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

its wrong, it puts many men in an appalling position - and its something that men need to contest and challenge.

I’ll challenge anything I think is wrong if it’s important enough to me. I think anyone would, regardless of their gender. In making your point above about what ‘men are told by society’, you’re ignoring the fact that 98% of parents who work in the home are women -


The vast majority (98%) of those who were looking after home/family in 2016 were women although the number of men looking after home/family nearly doubled in the 10 years up to 2016, rising from 4,900 to 9,200


Press Statement Women and Men in Ireland 2016 from the Central Statistics Office.

I’m not suggesting that men aren’t as capable as women of doing the same work as women. I’m saying that the issue isn’t something we are constantly told either by society or by women, it’s simply a fact that men themselves don’t appear to have the same interest as women in working in the home.

(FWIW I don’t consider being a parent the most important thing I’ll ever do in my life, I have other considerations which I place greater value in than simply being a parent)

And no, it’s not some “internalised sexism” or “internalised misandry” that I disagree with you, it’s just a fact that while men are just as capable as women of caring for their children, men and women care for their children in different ways. That doesn’t require convincing more men to stay at home with their children, it simply means acknowledging that in spite of some people’s ideological beliefs, parents will still make decisions for themselves and their families that they believe are in theirs and their children’s own best interests. This is the same way the courts make decisions about children’s welfare - in the children’s best interests is the standard used; decisions regarding children’s welfare aren’t based upon any gender politics.

And I will counter that there is still a societal stigma around being a "house-husband" and that the man is a feckless loser, if he acts so

citytillidie

JPF82 wrote: »

I listened to some of this on BBC radio 5 live. The female presenter did point out that she was stereotyping women as good and having no faults and asked her to point out faults of women.

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1160841956861157382?s=19

Women compromising just look at Northern Ireland with 2 women in charge. Can't even agree to have talks

Tombo2001

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I have to disagree with you there. Objectively, the legal system does no such thing.





I’ll challenge anything I think is wrong if it’s important enough to me. I think anyone would, regardless of their gender. In making your point above about what ‘men are told by society’, you’re ignoring the fact that 98% of parents who work in the home are women -


The vast majority (98%) of those who were looking after home/family in 2016 were women although the number of men looking after home/family nearly doubled in the 10 years up to 2016, rising from 4,900 to 9,200


Press Statement Women and Men in Ireland 2016 from the Central Statistics Office.

I’m not suggesting that men aren’t as capable as women of doing the same work as women. I’m saying that the issue isn’t something we are constantly told either by society or by women, it’s simply a fact that men themselves don’t appear to have the same interest as women in working in the home.

(FWIW I don’t consider being a parent the most important thing I’ll ever do in my life, I have other considerations which I place greater value in than simply being a parent)

And no, it’s not some “internalised sexism” or “internalised misandry” that I disagree with you, it’s just a fact that while men are just as capable as women of caring for their children, men and women care for their children in different ways. That doesn’t require convincing more men to stay at home with their children, it simply means acknowledging that in spite of some people’s ideological beliefs, parents will still make decisions for themselves and their families that they believe are in theirs and their children’s own best interests. This is the same way the courts make decisions about children’s welfare - in the children’s best interests is the standard used; decisions regarding children’s welfare aren’t based upon any gender politics.

I could disagree with you on a number of points above.

But this one in particular I am going to challenge as a single and most profound case in point.

Women can (but don't always choose to) breast feed.

After that - from the moment the child is born - what type of parenting can the woman do that the man is unable or incapable of doing. to do.

Name one.

Because that is ground zero to every other part of this conversation. And what you have described above is simply a 'truism'.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And I will counter that there is still a societal stigma around being a "house-husband" and that the man is a feckless loser, if he acts so

It’s not much of a counter-point but yes, you do have a point. I do acknowledge that there is a societal stigma around fathers working in the home. There’s a societal stigma against parents of either gender who choose to work in the home in modern society, but the forum is focused on the perspective of men so I have to try and stick to that.

Saying that though, I think neither society in general nor women are to blame for the perception that men who choose to work in the home are of lesser value in what they contribute to society than men in employment. I think the driving force behind that stigma isn’t coming from society or from women, but from men themselves. That’s why I made the point about reality being contrary to some people’s ideological beliefs - because the promotion of the idea of fathers working in the home is coming mainly primarily from feminists who argue that it would create a more equal society in opening up opportunities for women to enter the labour market. They’re categorically ignoring the reality of family life that suggests that women who work in the home choose to do so of their own volition, and men who work in employment also choose to do so, of their own volition.

That’s why I also made the point that fathers and mothers care for their children in different ways in reality, as opposed to an ideological imperative that regards working in the home, or parenting or employment as an equal division of labour that ought to be blind to gender. I don’t see what’s wrong in acknowledging that parents provide for their children according to how they believe is in their own children’s best interests and the welfare of their own families, and whatever role they choose is of equal value to their children, which from my perspective at least, is one of the most important aspects of being a parent.

Tombo2001

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I have to disagree with you there. Objectively, the legal system does no such thing.





I’ll challenge anything I think is wrong if it’s important enough to me. I think anyone would, regardless of their gender. In making your point above about what ‘men are told by society’, you’re ignoring the fact that 98% of parents who work in the home are women -


The vast majority (98%) of those who were looking after home/family in 2016 were women although the number of men looking after home/family nearly doubled in the 10 years up to 2016, rising from 4,900 to 9,200


Press Statement Women and Men in Ireland 2016 from the Central Statistics Office.

I’m not suggesting that men aren’t as capable as women of doing the same work as women. I’m saying that the issue isn’t something we are constantly told either by society or by women, it’s simply a fact that men themselves don’t appear to have the same interest as women in working in the home.

(FWIW I don’t consider being a parent the most important thing I’ll ever do in my life, I have other considerations which I place greater value in than simply being a parent)

And no, it’s not some “internalised sexism” or “internalised misandry” that I disagree with you, it’s just a fact that while men are just as capable as women of caring for their children, men and women care for their children in different ways. That doesn’t require convincing more men to stay at home with their children, it simply means acknowledging that in spite of some people’s ideological beliefs, parents will still make decisions for themselves and their families that they believe are in theirs and their children’s own best interests. This is the same way the courts make decisions about children’s welfare - in the children’s best interests is the standard used; decisions regarding children’s welfare aren’t based upon any gender politics.

So many things here that can be challenged.

The legal system - last I heard - gives women a mandatory 6 months maternity leave. And a further 16 weeks mandatory unpaid leave. Almost a full year off, mandatory - employer has no choice in the matter.

The legal system - only since 2016 - offer men a 2 WEEK mandatory paternity leave. Only introduced 2 years ago.....

You are saying Men don't seem to have 'the same interest' in staying at home to take care of kids.

FFS - its a no brainer for the woman to stay at home, with this discrepancy in the law......

One eyed Jack

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I could disagree with you on a number of points above.

But this one in particular I am going to challenge as a single and most profound case in point.

Women can (but don't always choose to) breast feed.

After that - from the moment the child is born - what type of parenting can the woman do that the man is unable or incapable of doing. to do.

Name one.

Because that is ground zero to every other part of this conversation. And what you have described above is simply a 'truism'.

I already acknowledged in the post you quoted, that men are just as capable as women of doing the same work as women. Saying that men and women care for their children in different ways doesn’t contradict that. It’s an acknowledgement of reality as opposed a mere truism.

Tombo2001

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I already acknowledged in the post you quoted, that men are just as capable as women of doing the same work as women. Saying that men and women care for their children in different ways doesn’t contradict that. It’s an acknowledgement of reality as opposed a mere truism.

You are misquoting yourself I'm afraid as you referred to men and women being capable of doing the same 'work'.

I am talking about something different, which is parenting.

Tombo2001

From an Oireachtas committee discussion earlier this year:

"Joint custody in a real 50:50 sense occurs in only about 1% of cases.

Outcomes in the family courts are bad for men and this is well attested."

One eyed Jack

Tombo2001 wrote: »

So many things here that can be challenged.

The legal system - last I heard - gives women a mandatory 6 months maternity leave. And a further 16 weeks mandatory unpaid leave. Almost a full year off, mandatory - employer has no choice in the matter.

The legal system - only since 2016 - offer men a 2 WEEK mandatory paternity leave. Only introduced 2 years ago.....

You are saying Men don't seem to have 'the same interest' in staying at home to take care of kids.

FFS - its a no brainer for the woman to stay at home, with this discrepancy in the law......

You’re arguing that one year out of employment for a woman who is employed is advantageous to women over men so much so that over the course of a child’s lifetime (from 0 - 16 being the point at which one would expect a child should be capable of functioning independently), that it credibly supports the notion of even being one of the main reasons for men choosing employment over working in the home?

The discrepancy in law you’re perceiving isn’t a discrepancy, it’s an acknowledgment of the biological reality that pregnancy and recovery can take an enormous toll on a woman’s body, and they should be granted time out from employment to recover from that. That’s something men simply don’t and will never experience. I still say that men don’t appear to have the same interest as women in working in the home, and when 98% of parents who choose to work in the home are women, your inference that the reason men don’t appear to have any interest because they aren’t granted equal time off from employment in the early years of their children’s lives, just doesn’t stack up.

Perhaps it’s not clear that when I say men don’t appear to have the same interest as women in working in the home as women, that doesn’t mean they don’t have the same interest in providing for and caring for their children as women. That’s what I mean when I said men and women care for their children differently.

One eyed Jack

Tombo2001 wrote: »

You are misquoting yourself I'm afraid as you referred to men and women being capable of doing the same 'work'.

I am talking about something different, which is parenting.

My answer would still have been the same.

One eyed Jack

Tombo2001 wrote: »

From an Oireachtas committee discussion earlier this year:

"Joint custody in a real 50:50 sense occurs in only about 1% of cases.

Outcomes in the family courts are bad for men and this is well attested."

Right, and as I pointed out already, decisions regarding children’s welfare are made in the best interests of the children, not in the best interests of their parents based upon the parents gender.

Tombo2001

......

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think the driving force behind that stigma isn’t coming from society or from women, but from men themselves.

There is a massive stigma in being a stay at home mum among working mothers. I have seen it firsthand with my wife, who is highly educated, and has a high level career now.

Stay at home dads are not looked on fondly by men, I'll give you that. Interestingly they are also the most likely to have affairs.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There is a massive stigma in being a stay at home mum among working mothers. I have seen it firsthand with my wife, who is highly educated, and has a high level career now.

Stay at home dads are not looked on fondly by men, I'll give you that.

Yeah I had mentioned it earlier alright that any perceived stigma applies to parents who choose to work in the home in modern society regardless of their gender, because working in the home just isn’t generally seen as making as valuable a contribution to society as something immediately tangible like current employment.

Been there too with my wife (we’re separated now but still married) in that she worked in the home throughout our 20 year relationship (12 years married? Fcuked if I can remember our anniversary :pac:), but I encouraged her to go back to education and upskill and study for a career she had always wanted to get into, but never had the time while working in the home.

Interestingly they are also the most likely to have affairs.

Really?

I’d be genuinely interested in reading about that if you have anything on it, sounds a bit off the wall tbh, but could be interesting

H3llR4iser

Deleted User wrote: »

There is a massive stigma in being a stay at home mum among working mothers. I have seen it firsthand with my wife, who is highly educated, and has a high level career now.

Indeed there is, it reaches ridiculous peaks and I'm quite puzzled about why, of all the forms of bullying and shaming, this never gets any talk time.

Also, it's absolutely nothing new - when I was born, my mother took a "career break" that turned out to become permanent after my brother's birth.

At various points in school, female teachers made snide remarks about her being a stay-at-home mother; At some point she couldn't make a teachers-parents meeting due to my grandfather being on his deathbed, and one of them went "I haven't seen your mother last night...it's not like she hasn't got the time, right, she doesn't work?". This was whereabouts of 25 years ago.

Deleted User wrote: »

Stay at home dads are not looked on fondly by men, I'll give you that. Interestingly they are also the most likely to have affairs.

I'm not sure about that...there'll always be the hard-nose "men should be men!" type, but in the few instances I met somebody who was in this position, the general attitude was pretty much the one you typical get from guys - "good for him! Why should I care?" or even the classic "he's got a sweet deal!" (he probably hasn't). Seems to be lightyears away from the disdain women get from other women, TBH.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Really?

I’d be genuinely interested in reading about that if you have anything on it, sounds a bit off the wall tbh, but could be interesting

I think I read about this as well a while ago; Something to do with the fact that, compared to working men, the ones caring for the kids get to meet stay-at-home mothers at school, parents meetings, playdates and whatnot...looks like there's a huge stigma going home with Jen from finance after the quarter end party, but no problem at all going to little Conor mom's home for "coffee" after dropping the sprogs in school

Reviews and Books Galore

Deleted User wrote: »

There is a massive stigma in being a stay at home mum among working mothers. I have seen it firsthand with my wife, who is highly educated, and has a high level career now.

Stay at home dads are not looked on fondly by men, I'll give you that. Interestingly they are also the most likely to have affairs.

I get a bit of a class vibe sometimes towards the negativity of stay at home mothers that could be similar to the attitudes towards farmers or builder men. Also, stay at home mothers were an important job for the economy a few decades ago, and it seems cruel to denigrate someone for working at home when in fact it was beyond a doubt an important part of building up the economy.

H3llR4iser

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I get a bit of a class vibe sometimes towards the negativity of stay at home mothers that could be similar to the attitudes towards farmers or builder men. Also, stay at home mothers were an important job for the economy a few decades ago, and it seems cruel to denigrate someone for working at home when in fact it was beyond a doubt an important part of building up the economy.

I'd say it's more than that - most people realize a farmer or a builder break their backs with work day in, day out. It's a class discrimination thing, but there's no implication that the work ain't actually work.

From what I've heard over the years, most of the "working ladies" looking down on stay-at-home parents, particularly women, seem to think all they do is watch TV on the couch between preparing meals.

Sleepy

My other half is a stay-at-home mother / occasional child-minder due to the high cost of childcare (her earning potential wouldn't cover the cost of childcare after taxation, commuting costs and associated costs of work).

Generally the type of grief a stay-at-home-mother gets seems to be related to class: If she's a single mum in a poorer area, she's seen as a lay-about who spends her day watching daytime soaps and playing games on Facebook. If she's married and in a nicer area, she's seen as a snooty "lady who lunches" "girlo" who spends her day fannying about in her land-rover drinking lattes and helicopter parenting her awfully named children.

In neither case is the reality of her spending half her day doing laundry, running around after the kids and managing a house depicted. Those activities seem to be presented in the media as the sole preserve of the "busy working mum" who's married to the lazy slob who spends his days playing and/or watching sport.

Cyclepath

I've known a fair few stay at home mums (including my ex) and one stay at home dad over the years.

The one common factor was that all of them had some sort of side-gig to make a few quid extra, for example collecting and minding kids after school for other working parents, or taking in spanish students during the summer season, one even made money knitting Arran jumpers!

In my experience though, the only criticism they received was from other working mums! The stay at home dad was the target of especially harsh criticism from working mothers too.

One of the stay at home mums had a theory that they were jealous of their financial comfort and ability to run a household on a single wage :rolleyes:

Disclaimer: This is anecdotal, I'm not presenting it as evidence of anything!

Pawwed Rig

A rather odd article that I am not sure what my thoughts on it are. https://www.rte.ie/news/newslens/2019/0818/1069455-cycle-speed-record/

Does a man not breaking the world record warrant an article?
Do I care about Male world records when they are not as good as the female world record? No is the answer.

Do I care about female world records when they are not as good as the Male world record? Yes is the answer.

silverharp

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

A rather odd article that I am not sure what my thoughts on it are. https://www.rte.ie/news/newslens/2019/0818/1069455-cycle-speed-record/

Does a man not breaking the world record warrant an article?
Do I care about Male world records when they are not as good as the female world record? No is the answer.

Do I care about female world records when they are not as good as the Male world record? Yes is the answer.

I just cant get past the idea that its a world record worth doing? its cheating

pwurple

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

A rather odd article that I am not sure what my thoughts on it are. https://www.rte.ie/news/newslens/2019/0818/1069455-cycle-speed-record/

Does a man not breaking the world record warrant an article?
Do I care about Male world records when they are not as good as the female world record? No is the answer.

Do I care about female world records when they are not as good as the Male world record? Yes is the answer.

I don't get your point here... he broke the male slipstream record. There is an article, you linked to it.

Are you saying there should not be an article, because the women's slipstream record was faster?

Surely both warrant note, it's bloody fast!

Pawwed Rig

pwurple wrote: »

I don't get your point here... he broke the male slipstream record. There is an article, you linked to it.

Are you saying there should not be an article, because the women's slipstream record was faster?

Surely both warrant note, it's bloody fast!

The point is I don't care* about male records where they are slower than female records but do care about female records that are slower than male records.



*care to the extent that I am not going to stay up at night worrying about it but recognise a contradiction within myself.

Pawwed Rig

pwurple wrote: »

Are you saying there should not be an article, because the women's slipstream record was faster?

Yes

newport2

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The point is I don't care* about male records where they are slower than female records but do care about female records that are slower than male records.



*care to the extent that I am not going to stay up at night worrying about it but recognise a contradiction within myself.

It's RTE, get woke. The whole point of the article was to tell you that the men's record is slower than the women's one. If it wasn't there wouldn't have been an article.

...Ghost...

newport2 wrote: »

It's RTE, get woke. The whole point of the article was to tell you that the men's record is slower than the women's one. If it wasn't there wouldn't have been an article.

Nail on the head. Thinly veiled "a woman holds the record" article.

the_pen_turner

silverharp wrote: »

I just cant get past the idea that its a world record worth doing? its cheating

leave aside the gender stuff.
how is this a thing. the car is doing all the work. if your allowed to just bolt yourself to other stuff then 290+kph isnt very fast. the land speed record for a car is over 1220 kph. 290 is sunday driving in comparison

Calhoun

newport2 wrote: »

It's RTE, get woke. The whole point of the article was to tell you that the men's record is slower than the women's one. If it wasn't there wouldn't have been an article.

Sickening we might have to pay more to the greedy in montrose soon .

Pawwed Rig

the_pen_turner wrote: »

leave aside the gender stuff.
how is this a thing. the car is doing all the work. if your allowed to just bolt yourself to other stuff then 290+kph isnt very fast. the land speed record for a car is over 1220 kph. 290 is sunday driving in comparison

I assume the record was that he maintained or increased the speed he was going at while slip streaming for a specified period of time after being released by the Porsche.
What he was doing is irrelevant to my point though. Should there be records and female records rather than male and female records?

kyler_87

Calhoun wrote: »

Sickening we might have to pay more to the greedy in montrose soon .

Agree wholeheartedly

silverharp

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I assume the record was that he maintained or increased the speed he was going at while slip streaming for a specified period of time after being released by the Porsche.
What he was doing is irrelevant to my point though. Should there be records and female records rather than male and female records?

I assume is more a function of length of the track , and a runway isn’t long enough? There is a human element and given that men can cycle faster than women its only a matter of time before a man will go for the record for their 15minutes. From then on it will revert to record holder and female record holder.

For sporting records this kind of catagorising is only going to happen where lots of technology involved. Record time in space for example is purely down to technology and the country involved, the gender of the “passenger” is irrelevant so its kind of a mute point whether there is a female record of who has been in space the longest (for example)

rightmove

kyler_87 wrote: »

Agree wholeheartedly

Perhaps men should object to paying for a licence fee where the state broadcaster is so blatantly in favour of discriminating against men

Reviews and Books Galore

rightmove wrote: »

Perhaps men should object to paying for a licence fee where the state broadcaster is so blatantly in favour of discriminating against men

I'd be curious about the effect if men gave up work for a day to protest housing/suicide/homelessness. Rubbish wouldn't be picked up for one, dishes wouldn't be washed in restuarants, chefs wouldn't be there to cook, buses wouldn't arrive, and so on and so forth.



Or there would be twitter stories saying that there is no effect and men are useless. :P

iptba

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I'd be curious about the effect if men gave up work for a day to protest housing/suicide/homelessness. Rubbish wouldn't be picked up for one, dishes wouldn't be washed in restuarants, chefs wouldn't be there to cook, buses wouldn't arrive, and so on and so forth.



Or there would be twitter stories saying that there is no effect and men are useless. :P

I'll bring it up at the next meeting of our local patriarchy branch. We control everything you know ... :rolleyes:

the_pen_turner

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I'd be curious about the effect if men gave up work for a day to protest housing/suicide/homelessness. Rubbish wouldn't be picked up for one, dishes wouldn't be washed in restuarants, chefs wouldn't be there to cook, buses wouldn't arrive, and so on and so forth.



Or there would be twitter stories saying that there is no effect and men are useless. :P

no thy would twist it around to show how much power and control men have compared to women

dickangel

Work is offering leadership and assertiveness classes for women. A colleague of mine asked if he could attend because he struggles with asserting himself in work. He was told no, that it's only for women. I would have liked to go as well, seems it would be more beneficial to the company if everyone could partake.

the_pen_turner

dickangel wrote: »

Work is offering leadership and assertiveness classes for women. A colleague of mine asked if he could attend because he struggles with asserting himself in work. He was told no, that it's only for women. I would have liked to go as well, seems it would be more beneficial to the company if everyone could partake.

he should have put his foot down and not taken no for an answer:D:D:D:D

rightmove

dickangel wrote: »

Work is offering leadership and assertiveness classes for women. A colleague of mine asked if he could attend because he struggles with asserting himself in work. He was told no, that it's only for women. I would have liked to go as well, seems it would be more beneficial to the company if everyone could partake.

How come this is not discrimination???

the_pen_turner

rightmove wrote: »

How come this is not discrimination???

because its against men. if it was against black people, lgbt,women, old,etc then it would be wrong but perfectly acceptable against men

dickangel

rightmove wrote: »

How come this is not discrimination???

Apparently we are all already super confident and charismatic and couldn't possibly harbour any insecurities. So work sees it as unnecessary to provide for us.

handlemaster

This sexism PC can get so far down the road of trying not to be sexist it ends up been sexist or just plain stupid.

Self-identify as a woman for the day and see what they say.

KrustyUCC

rightmove wrote: »

How come this is not discrimination???

Not that it is right but it would be seen as 'positive discrimination'

Funny how 'positive discrimination' only works one way

rightmove

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Not that it is right but it would be seen as 'positive discrimination'

Funny how 'positive discrimination' only works one way

Contradiction in term

Calhoun

They could be opening themselves up for some issues legally.

Probably be easier to create uproar locally than going legal.

Reviews and Books Galore

iptba wrote: »

I'll bring it up at the next meeting of our local patriarchy branch. We control everything you know ... :rolleyes:

All joking aside, it would be a great sociological experiment. I am honestly wondering how it would affect it and I feel like it should go on for two days ot measure it.



Also, assertiveness training is kind of silly sometimes. If you work in a company you hate to eat **** and work with people you don't like. Being assertive in every situation isn't actually a good thing.

silverharp

At least it wasn't diversity training where you (white male scum) have to lean out to give everyone else a chance ;-)