WTF is mansplaining?

OscarMIlde

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

I'm going to start identifying as a woman.

If they accuse me of mansplaining, I'll accuse them of misgendering me.

That's transplaining then. Try to keep up.

TaurenDruid

Deleted User wrote: »

Should jokes about men's penises or their ability in bed, or how they roll over and sleep after sex or their obsession with football or the fact they are slovenly or stupid be considered sexist?

It should definitely be considered boring.

TaurenDruid

TaurenDruid wrote: »

It should definitely be considered boring.

But not sexist?

99nsr125

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Straw - at the risk of being sexist - man argument.

Agreed, there is no grand conspiracy of men to keep women down, but I don't think anyone here has claimed there is.

"The patriarchy" refers to the way society has evolved. It just is there.

* All major world religions - run by men, little voice for women.

* 23 incumbent world leaders are women (195 countries in the world, so 11%.)

* Just 12% of CEOs in Irish companies are women - CSO

* Under 5% of Europe’s top companies have a female CEO

* Women make up just 22.5% of TDs

* The Irish cabinet has roughly 18 to 20 members, depending on the government. In the 32 cabinets we've had since the foundation of the state there has only ever been 22 female cabinet ministers, total.

So, yeah... the patriarchy exists.

It's good to see you have accepted we are better, no superior than you

cloudatlas

cloudatlas wrote: »

Nobody here is interested in the 2016 report we can't find the report mentioned in the article.

That was for illustrative purposes, to show that yes, there are indeed different levels of managers and yes, the men do indeed outweigh the women by a factor of 4:1. But you knew that.

cloudatlas wrote: »

I don't have a clue what they meant by base pay being less as we don't have the report.

It makes the distinction very early in the article: "The base salaries of Dublin Bus’s female employees are on average 6 per cent higher than they are for male employees, though men still take home an average of 2.3 per cent more money than women when overtime and shift pay rates are included"

So, base pay = whats in your contract and actual pay depends on hours and shift patterns worked. But you knew that as well and are being deliberately obtuse.

cloudatlas wrote: »

It seems to imply that you hold contempt for that particular charity, but who knows. Who gives a damn also, they will get money from other quarters.

That's your interpretation of it and I've already pointed out that's wide of the mark. I've made a donation, anyway, and that marks an end to my participation in this conversation. You are giving the impression that you're misinterpreting practically everything, both in the article and with the mythical "pay gap". Whether that is deliberate or not, only you really know.

There's nothing worse than watching threads descend into this tit for tat bullsh1t between two posters, so I'm out.

Take care, and stay safe.

cloudatlas

Deleted User wrote: »

That was for illustrative purposes, to show that yes, there are indeed different levels of managers and yes, the men do indeed outweigh the women by a factor of 4:1. But you knew that.



It makes the distinction very early in the article: "The base salaries of Dublin Bus’s female employees are on average 6 per cent higher than they are for male employees, though men still take home an average of 2.3 per cent more money than women when overtime and shift pay rates are included"

So, base pay = whats in your contract and actual pay depends on hours and shift patterns worked. But you knew that as well and are being deliberately obtuse.



That's your interpretation of it and I've already pointed out that's wide of the mark. I've made a donation, anyway, and that marks an end to my participation in this conversation. You are giving the impression that you're misinterpreting practically everything, both in the article and with the mythical "pay gap". Whether that is deliberate or not, only you really know.

There's nothing worse than watching threads descend into this tit for tat bullsh1t between two posters, so I'm out.

Take care, and stay safe.

Yes and then it says that women are on less base pay in the managerial level and that's where they all are based admin. For god sake.

I'm sure you did donate just there, yeah.

Not just there, no. Monday night, got the email yesterday morning.

Bye.

cloudatlas

Deleted User wrote: »

Not just there, no. Monday night, got the email yesterday morning.

Bye.

Well good for you, I'm actually really surprised because it sounded like you were saying if pigs might fly you'd donate so fair play. Many posters on here don't like the RCC and have cast aspersions on their statistics in the past.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

cloudatlas wrote: »

Many posters on here don't like the RCC and have cast aspersions on their statistics in the past.

Do you have any evidence of this?

And an apology for $hifty

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

But it's dangerous to say sexist jokes can be banned because you only have to look at this thread to see that some people can and will try to label anything they want as sexist. Who gets to decide?

The comedy police of course! Banning jokes is a slippery slope i think, we're veering into thought crime territory ffs!

If you don't find a joke funny, don't laugh at it - is that really so hard? Is hearing a joke you don't think is the very pinnacle of hilarity really that traumatic?

If you're a comedian and the crowds aren't laughing at you, you won't last very long...it'll be an rte panel show for you i'm afraid.

TaurenDruid

99nsr125 wrote: »

It's good to see you have accepted we are better, no superior than you

Trolling score: 2 out of 10.

No build-up, thought or build-up to a takedown, just a one-sentence ad hominem. Lack of effort can probably be excused by the late hour of the response, but frankly, I expect better. Would not employ again.

anewme

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The comedy police of course! Banning jokes is a slippery slope i think, we're veering into thought crime territory ffs!

If you don't find a joke funny, don't laugh at it - is that really so hard? Is hearing a joke you don't think is the very pinnacle of hilarity really that traumatic?

If you're a comedian and the crowds aren't laughing at you, you won't last very long...it'll be an rte panel show for you i'm afraid.

Its nothing to do with the Comedy Police.

The problem here is actually what is defined as a 'Joke'. What is comedy? One mans comedy is another mans bullying.

Bullying, racism and sexism are often described as jokes or banter, once the person making the ' joke' is called out on it.

A woman complaining about something must be menstruating is not a joke. It is not comedy. It is sexist and designed to belittle the person.

Rather than ignore it, it should be challenged every time someone says it - if something like this was said in a work situation, there would be serious repercussions for the joker.

Life changes, there is more pushback on what is respectful and acceptable conduct in all areas of life.

Some of the people here would want to be very careful with the dinosaur attitudes or they will find themselves in hot water with their archiac views, which have no place in modern society.

Proper order.

Badly Drunk Boy

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Trolling score: 2 out of 10.

No build-up, thought or build-up to a takedown, just a one-sentence ad hominem. Lack of effort can probably be excused by the late hour of the response, but frankly, I expect better. Would not employ again.

Not 'ad feminem'?

anewme

anewme wrote: »

Its nothing to do with the Comedy Police.

The problem here is actually what is defined as a 'Joke'. What is comedy? One mans comedy is another mans bullying.

Bullying, racism and sexism are often described as jokes or banter, once the person making the ' joke' is called out on it.

A woman complaining about something must be menstruating is not a joke. It is not comedy. It is sexist and designed to belittle the person.

Rather than ignore it, it should be challenged every time someone says it - if something like this was said in a work situation, there would be serious repercussions for the joker.

What is your definition of a joke?

What are the parameters you would impose to call people out on what YOU deem to be sexist or archaic?

What if a woman was making a joke about women menstuating? Is that acceptable? Amy Schumer would be ****ed if not.

Jokes about premature ejaculation? Is that archaic too?

Are jokes about 9/11 allowed? If not, then should jokes about the titanic be also challenged?

Boards.ie is not the workplace and shouldn't be policed as such. I say lots of things here that I wouldn't say in a workplace.


also:

Its nothing to do with the Comedy Police.

Some of the people here would want to be very careful with the dinosaur attitudes or they will find themselves in hot water with their archiac views, which have no place in modern society.

lol

sbsquarepants

anewme wrote: »

Bullying, racism and sexism are often described as jokes or banter, once the person making the ' joke' is called out on it.

A woman complaining about something must be menstruating is not a joke. It is not comedy. It is sexist and designed to belittle the person.

If 1 person makes the same joke repeatedly then maybe you have a case for bullying. I've told you 10 times that's not funny, why do you keep saying it?

If 10 people make the same unfunny joke over time, well then that's just life - suck it the fúck up and quit your whinging ffs!

We all hear jokes we don't find funny - so what?

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

We all hear jokes we don't find funny - so what?

The people who offend will be in "hot water" apparently.

It would be interesting to know where the line is regarding when something become offensive.

The way certain people talk, you'd swear it wasn't different for every single individual in the world. It's almost as if they believe that whatever THEY find offensive is the line that should never be crossed.

Actually, it's so annoying, I find it offensive.

Into the hot water with them!!!!

anewme

Deleted User wrote: »

The people who offend will be in "hot water" apparently.

It would be interesting to know where the line is regarding when something become offensive.

The way certain people talk, you'd swear it wasn't different for every single individual in the world. It's almost as if they believe that whatever THEY find offensive is the line that should never be crossed.

Actually, it's so annoying, I find it offensive.

Into the hot water with them!!!!

If people go around in real life saying women are hormonal or menstruating if they complain about anything - they will get a reality check and depending on where they say it, there will be implications for them.

Not sure why you cant see that?


That's what happens in the real world. The OP was giving an example as to what happens in the real world - he got the head chewed off him, rightly or wrongly. People now wont tolerate sexism or racism or bullying or allow it be written off as a joke.

There is no set line as to what can be deemed offensive, err on the side of caution maybe, but a guideline you may wish to observe is to avoid sex, religion and politics. Ususally ends in a row. If you need to be told that, you need to brush up on your social interpersonal skills - in the real world, that is.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

If people go around in real life saying women are hormonal or menstruating if they complain about anything - they will get a reality check and depending on where they say it, there will be implications for them.

Not sure why you cant see that?


That's what happens in the real world. The OP was giving an example as to what happens in the real world - he got the head chewed off him, rightly or wrongly. People now wont tolerate sexism or racism or bullying or allow it be written off as a joke.

There is no set line as to what can be deemed offensive, err on the side of caution maybe, but a guideline you may wish to observe is to avoid sex, religion and politics. Ususally ends in a row. If you need to be told that, you need to brush up on your social interpersonal skills - in the real world, that is.

If people were constantly going around and saying ANYTHING repeatedly, they are in for a reality check. My point was, making a joke is very different scenario and one you used as an example as something which shouldn't be tolerated.

There are implications for ANYTHING you say or do. For example, an implication of someone trying to dictate what people can or can't say for fear of being labelled a dinosaur will often result in people avoiding that person and not wanting to be in their company lest they dare offend them.

Everything has the potential to be offensive. Absolutely everything.

If sexism isn't tolerated anymore, how come you haven't given out about the phrase mansplaining which is undoubtedly sexist? Why is certain sexism allowed?

What comedians do you find funny as a matter of interest?

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

The people who offend will be in "hot water" apparently.

It would be interesting to know where the line is regarding when something become offensive.

Well personally, the line for me is everything i find offensive, is offensive, and everything i don't find offensive, isn't.


The problem is that is also the case for everyone else. You can't live like that, who can be arsed watching every single word they say lest you offend someone? As far as i'm concerned some people, a growing number of a certain type of people, if i'm being honest, find practically everything offensive. They get offended on behalf of other people ffs.


Sometimes things offend you. That's just life. If someone is being offensive just to cause offense, then they are probably a bit of a dick. But if you are offended at someone innocently having a laugh, maybe you need to look more at yourself than at them!


If you're offended that someones opinion is just different to yours, then so the fúck what. They don't owe your opinion any special respect, it doesn't carry some particularly solemn weight, you taking offence at their disagreement is neither here nor there.

TaurenDruid

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Well personally, the line for me is everything i find offensive, is offensive, and everything i don't find offensive, isn't.


The problem is that is also the case for everyone else. You can't live like that, who can be arsed watching every single word they say lest you offend someone? As far as i'm concerned some people, a growing number of a certain type of people, if i'm being honest, find practically everything offensive. They get offended on behalf of other people ffs.


Sometimes things offend you. That's just life. If someone is being offensive just to cause offense, then they are probably a bit of a dick. But if you are offended at someone innocently having a laugh, maybe you need to look more at yourself than at them!


If you're offended that someones opinion is just different to yours, then so the fúck what. They don't owe your opinion any special respect, it doesn't carry some particularly solemn weight, you taking offence at their disagreement is neither here nor there.

I agree with a lot of this. Everyone has the right to be offended. Nobody has the right to not be offended.

If you're called on being offensive (generic "you"), though, it's worth examining why someone called you on it, imho, rather than just going "Ah, **** off, it was just banter, you can't say anything nowadays, the PC brigade... etc."

Sometimes banter is just banter - great. Sometimes, not so much, it's bullying or racism or sexism disguised as humour. Good humour shouldn't be punching down, it should punch up or at least be an equal playing field. And boring stereotypes ("She's won't crack a smile, must be menstruating", "Sure we all know men are ****e at housework") are just boring, not funny.

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

If you're offended that someones opinion is just different to yours, then so the fúck what. They don't owe your opinion any special respect, it doesn't carry some particularly solemn weight, you taking offence at their disagreement is neither here nor there.

Exactly, just because you find something offensive that doesn't give you any extra say in whether or not it holds any merit or value. Look at the sh1tshow in France with radical Muslims lopping heads off poor auld biddies because of a few poxy cartoons.

Some folk are lightning rods for offense and the SJW brigade run around seeking out any cause for offence on behalf of cause, after cause, after cause. The great Stephen Fry has spoken on this matter before and puts it across ever so eloquently:

It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."

sbsquarepants

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I agree with a lot of this. Everyone has the right to be offended. Nobody has the right to not be offended.

100%

TaurenDruid wrote: »

If you're called on being offensive (generic "you"), though, it's worth examining why someone called you on it, imho, rather than just going "Ah, **** off, it was just banter, you can't say anything nowadays, the PC brigade... etc."

I don't know - is it worth it?

Personally i wouldn't bother arguing with anyone, if i accidentally offended them with a joke, i'd apologise and i'd actually be sorry. But i wouldn't then embark on an intense soul searching examination of myself - i just wouldn't joke around with them again. I can live without perma-offended company.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Sometimes banter is just banter - great. Sometimes, not so much, it's bullying or racism or sexism disguised as humour. Good humour shouldn't be punching down, it should punch up or at least be an equal playing field. And boring stereotypes ("She's won't crack a smile, must be menstruating", "Sure we all know men are ****e at housework") are just boring, not funny.

To you. To me too by the way, but that doesn't mean they should be censored in some way, i just don't laugh at them - that's all the punishment an unfunny joke requires.

Different people find different things funny, that's hardly news!

TaurenDruid

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I agree with a lot of this. Everyone has the right to be offended. Nobody has the right to not be offended.

If you're called on being offensive (generic "you"), though, it's worth examining why someone called you on it, imho, rather than just going "Ah, **** off, it was just banter, you can't say anything nowadays, the PC brigade... etc."

Sometimes banter is just banter - great. Sometimes, not so much, it's bullying or racism or sexism disguised as humour. Good humour shouldn't be punching down, it should punch up or at least be an equal playing field. And boring stereotypes ("She's won't crack a smile, must be menstruating", "Sure we all know men are ****e at housework") are just boring, not funny.

We are in agreement in the most part.

However, the "punching down" part has me disagreeing as it is too subjective.

TaurenDruid

TaurenDruid wrote: »

If you're called on being offensive (generic "you"), though, it's worth examining why someone called you on it, imho, rather than just going "Ah, **** off, it was just banter, you can't say anything nowadays, the PC brigade... etc."

It depends on context, to be honest. The vast majority of times I've heard it being said, it was somebody taking offense where a) there was no harm intended (and intention plays a huge role in this) and b) where any reasonable person would not find the situation offensive.

You cannot kowtow to / plámás everybody, simply because everybody's line is in a different spot. If you try to please the extremists, you're doomed.

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

Exactly, just because you find something offensive that doesn't give you any extra say in whether or not it holds any merit or value. Look at the sh1tshow in France with radical Muslims lopping heads off poor auld biddies because of a few poxy cartoons.

Exactly. One of the best cartoons i've ever seen was a drawing of 3 identical stick men with a caption "One of these is the prophet Mohamed, which one offends you the most?"

Deleted User wrote: »

Some folk are lightning rods for offense and the SJW brigade run around seeking out any cause for offence on behalf of cause, after cause, after cause. The great Stephen Fry has spoken on this matter before and puts it across ever so eloquently:

You gotta love Stephen!