Modern Feminism-Good for Society?

kildare lad

FunLover18 wrote: »

Why is it that women should suffer the professional consequences of having a child more than men though? Obviously I know women need the time off to recover from childbirth physically and emotionally but I would have thought that doing less overtime and being more job security conscious would be things that affect a new father as well.

The choice to have a child is a joint one (mostly) but as you point out and as I'm sure most would agree it is usually the mother whose career takes a hit.

I don't know if I have a point tbh, just an observation.

Do you have kids ?

Wibbs

growleaves wrote: »

Instead we just get leftist poison.

It's not just "leftist poison" G, not even close IMHO. This divisiveness and endless runs to victimhood and labels and fear and sensitivity and fear of and sensitivity around debate is lately endemic across western society, no matter what politic you care to consider.

For me it's deeply indicative of a wider malaise borne on the back of a creeping western internal insecurity about itself. Any society that is "triggered" by certain subjects and politics and philosophies and clings to Accepted Truths is afraid to ask questions, which means answers never come.

FunLover18

kildare lad wrote: »

I just quoted the posters comment about why more men do higher paying jobs in companies and women end up as secretaries etc I was just trying to enlighten the poster from my own experience around people who've top positions in companies , it comes with lots of sacrifices be it , lack of social and family life etc

So top positions come with sacrifice, I'm still not sure what your point is or how it relates to feminism.

Mad_maxx

true-or-false wrote: »

Yeah, again, that's not what the gender pay gap is. Equal pay for equal work is a different thing.

the latter is portrayed as the former by feminists

jam_mac_jam

FunLover18 wrote: »

Why is it that women should suffer the professional consequences of having a child more than men though? Obviously I know women need the time off to recover from childbirth physically and emotionally but I would have thought that doing less overtime and being more job security conscious would be things that affect a new father as well.

The choice to have a child is a joint one (mostly) but as you point out and as I'm sure most would agree it is usually the mother whose career takes a hit.

I don't know if I have a point tbh, just an observation.

Oh I agree with you. Some of it is society and expectations that it will be the woman. Some of it is men not take their share of work. Some of it is society. But some of it is choice. And biology.

I give less of a **** about overrime and my career because I wanted to see my child. I am sure there are men like that as well. But I would be fairly sure it would be more common with women. Not all women not all men. Just in general.

Vestiapx

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Well one generation. It's her daughter not her granddaughter.

The change from the old civil service poiicy pre 1973 to the daughter being an Electronic Engineer is one generation but the change from 1973 to where we are today is two.

I would argue that in one generation there was still a lot of issues. I trained as an electronic engineer in the Dit in the early 90s and birth control was prescription only and hard to get back then. Far more boys that girls were attending third level and out of a class of three figures only two were female.

The generation of women attending college today or entering the workplace today face none of the issues your sister would have had or the absoly barriers your mother had.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.

FunLover18

FunLover18 wrote: »

So top positions come with sacrifice, I'm still not sure what your point is or how it relates to feminism.

I feel like you understand the context completely to be honest.men are more likely to prioritize work hence the reason there tend to be more ceos which was a conversation occurring when this poster posted

Wibbs

anewme wrote: »

Sorry, but it's as clear as day in this thread,. Let's talk about boobs, burn the bras, casual sexism, throw in a bit of transphobia for good measure.

Or you could view some of that as After Hours banter. Depends on one's viewpoint.

Robust discussion is fine, but you are not seeing robust discussion...its all one sided whinging and generalisations.

Blue haired nose ring lesbians....yet I notice that no one spoke out about that gross generalisation.

Then why don't you engage in robust discussion? The floor is yours, just like it is for "boobs" guy.

Women have recently expressed concerns about the stsndard of discussions on boards and their fear of posting. The moderators have a duty of care to uphold the basic qualitative standards of boards.ie and calibration of same across all forums. Demeaning women to boobs or burning bras is the type of casual sexism that should be called out and actioned.

This is evident on this thread, the demeaning of women to boobs, bras and then of course trans people, sure they have no say whatsoever.

There is an echo chamber alright, but it's all one way.

Again, the floor is yours. Why don't you engage in debate with the non "boobs, bras and Trans" posts? Or is it far easier to call an "ism" and feel vindicated? It seems it is. You certainly didn't engage with the actual points I raised in the post you quoted.

Mad_maxx

anewme wrote: »

This thread has it all..sexism, misogyny, transphobia...in fact, it is a case in point of what needs to be tackled by Boards Management.

virtue signallers too

MadameHussein

johnmck wrote: »

I think it really has led women to believe they can have it all. The career, the sex in the city lifestyle, the Instagram beach photos with the tatoed surfer due in Bali, while spending 8 years finding herself upskilling to become a yoga teacher. Waiting for Clooney while posting photos on Tinder of Machu Pichu and that infamous swing, after too many weekends to remember riding the cock-carousel and then suddenly coming to an abrupt realisation around 35 /36, oh tiktok tik tok those eggs are almost all gone...

Where can I find this cock-carousel? Asking for a friend.

Mad_maxx

Mad_maxx wrote: »

the latter is portrayed as the former by feminists

I support feminism. So you're saying that I portray the opposite of what you've just quoted me as saying?


And before anyone pounces, no, being in favour of feminism doesn't mean I support everything any feminist has ever said, so don't bother asking me to justify random quotes from feminists.

shtpEdthePlum

The fact that there seems to be absolutely feckall mods/admins on boards who are female, except the lovely Catmaniac and a handful of others, speaks volumes. It's meant to be a boys club. I just take solace in the fact that with every passing day, women are closer to leveling the playing-field, and one day chauvinist dumps will be few and far between. That's why the dying gasps seen in these kinds of places are so frantic.

anewme

kildare lad wrote: »

I just quoted the posters comment about why more men do higher paying jobs in companies and women end up as secretaries etc I was just trying to enlighten the poster from my own experience around people who've top positions in companies , it comes with lots of sacrifices be it , lack of social and family life etc

Women 'end up' as Secretaries sums up in one sentence what your opinion is of women.

Have you been watching too many mad men box sets?

I'm not sure what your definition is of 'top companies', but I'd be interested to find out.

JoChervil

Silentcorner wrote: »

It's a movement rooted in dishonesty, this wave that is, whatever wave we are on now!

And it's everywhere today, work, media, education.

It's a movement driven by emotion, not reason.

It's a movement devoid of accountability for the dishonesty.

It's a movement devoid of logical consistency.

It is a simple persons movement really, you don't have to think too hard about it or question it too deeply, just a nice twitter handle and a cheap and easy way to feel good about oneself.

So do you feel good about yourself now?

Mad_maxx

true-or-false wrote: »

I support feminism. So you're saying that I portray the opposite of what you've just quoted me as saying?


And before anyone pounces, no, being in favour of feminism doesn't mean I support everything any feminist has ever said, so don't bother asking me to justify random quotes from feminists.

feminists portray the wage - income gap as being the same thing as the " gender pay gap "

its deliberately dishonest and misleading

there is also an ethnic or nationality pay gap , the average american working in ireland earns a lot more than than average romanian or Nigerian yet an american cardiac surgeon working in the Mater hospital will not be paid anymore by the HSE than a Nigerian cardiac surgeon working in the Mater hospital for the HSE

The " gender pay gap " thing only requires being taken seriously if you are someone who believes that everyone should be paid the exact same regardless of hours worked , level of qualification or market demand , not surprisingly most of this kind of activism is rooted in marxism

Vestiapx

true-or-false wrote: »

I support feminism. So you're saying that I portray the opposite of what you've just quoted me as saying?


And before anyone pounces, no, being in favour of feminism doesn't mean I support everything any feminist has ever said, so don't bother asking me to justify random quotes from feminists.

That's a good point tho, people are becoming so polarised that of a person identifys as a feminist or supports feminism that can be seen as supporting all feminists and feminism. It's similar to blaming black people for violent crime or travellers for petty theft. It's unfair and it's not a black persons responsibility to justify or explain the actions of all black people.

So the question I would ask is where are the moderate feminists that subscribe to my liberal socially inclusive politics but who in general don't have any truck with some of the more outlandish or extreme and more active on social media so more visual feminists that I personally find distasteful.

Vestiapx

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

The fact that there seems to be absolutely feckall mods/admins on boards who are female, except the lovely Catmaniac and a handful of others, speaks volumes. It's meant to be a boys club. I just take solace in the fact that with every passing day, women are closer to leveling the playing-field, and one day chauvinist dumps will be few and far between. That's why the dying gasps seen in these kinds of places are so frantic.

Do you believe in freedom of speech?

kildare lad

FunLover18 wrote: »

So top positions come with sacrifice, I'm still not sure what your point is or how it relates to feminism.

Because it's feminists that keep spouting on about there's less female ceos etc. It doesn't come with sacrifice , it comes with a lot of sacrifice . If you are willing to see f all of your kids growing up go for it. Or better still start your own company and work 70 to 80 hours a week getting it going and have no life except work . I think men and women are built differently. Women are more compassionate and caring which are two traits that don't get you to the top of the business world unfortunately.

Yurt2

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

The fact that there seems to be absolutely feckall mods/admins on boards who are female, except the lovely Catmaniac and a handful of others, speaks volumes. It's meant to be a boys club. I just take solace in the fact that with every passing day, women are closer to leveling the playing-field, and one day chauvinist dumps will be few and far between. That's why the dying gasps seen in these kinds of places are so frantic.

I'm not aware of the gender breakdown of mods on boards, but if it is overwhelmingly male, isn't that a point of interest and instructive in and of itself?

There's no grand conspiracy shutting females out of modding roles, in fact I'd wager they'd be glad to have women stepping up?

It's the very same in politics. The commentary is about women not being present in the upper echelons of politics.

This is my observance and I'll get pilloried for it, but it's what I've found. Go to any cumman or party branch meeting in Ireland. From the left to the right the story is the same. The dog-catchers are males, out canvassing it's typically males outnumbering women 4 or 5 to 1. Turning up week after week it's the same. Women aren't being shut out, they're not turning up for kick-off! Don't ask me for an explanation why that is. But I know that nobody is going to turn up at females' door to parachute them into being the Minister of Justice / Foreign Affairs for the heck of it. The funny thing is, women are statistically more likely to be elected than men in local and general elections when they do run - there's just less of them in the system. Which in a circular line of reasoning that is typical, is apparently the patriarchy.

shtpEdthePlum

Vestiapx wrote: »

Do you believe in freedom of speech?

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. I'm just saying it has organically-imbued obsolescence.

kildare lad

anewme wrote: »

Women 'end up' as Secretaries sums up in one sentence what your opinion is of women.

Have you been watching too many mad men box sets?

I'm not sure what your definition is of 'top companies', but I'd be interested to find out.

In a previous post I said my accountant and doctor were women and yet you try to imply I'm a sexist .

Never seen Mad Men , thanks for the recommendation .

Leg End Reject

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

organically-imbued obsolescence.

Indeed, my thoughts exactly ...

anewme

Wibbs wrote: »

Or you could view some of that as After Hours banter. Depends on one's viewpoint.

Then why don't you engage in robust discussion? The floor is yours, just like it is for "boobs" guy.

Again, the floor is yours. Why don't you engage in debate with the non "boobs, bras and Trans" posts? Or is it far easier to call an "ism" and feel vindicated? It seems it is. You certainly didn't engage with the actual points I raised in the post you quoted.

I've said early on in this thread that I've no idea about feminism, left right or centre, so I'm not going to argue with people who have read on it or know wave 1, 2, 3 or whatever it is.

Notwithstanding that, I'm 100 percent clear when someone is trying to demean women or equate their value to a pair of boobs.

So, rather than waffle on, I'll only comment on what I'm knowledgeable on and feel strongly about. I'm sure you will agree that's a perfectly reasonable argument.

Yurt!

Yurt! wrote: »

I'm not aware of the gender breakdown of mods on boards, but if it is overwhelmingly male, isn't that a point of interest and instructive in and of itself?

There's no grand conspiracy shutting females out of modding roles, in fact I'd wager they'd be glad to have women stepping up?

It's the very same in politics. The commentary is about women not being present in the upper echelons of politics.

This is my observance and I'll get pilloried for it, but it's what I've found. Go to any cumman or party branch meeting in Ireland. From the left to the right the story is the same. The dog-catchers are males, out canvassing it's typically males outnumbering women 4 or 5 to 1. Turning up week after week it's the same. Women aren't being shut out, they're not turning up for kick-off! Don't ask me for an explanation why that is. But I know that nobody is going to turn up at females' door to parachute them into being the Minister of Justice / Foreign Affairs for the heck of it. The funny thing is, women are statistically more likely to be elected than men in local and general elections when they do run - there's just less of them in the system. Which in a circular line of reasoning that is typical, is apparently the patriarchy.

As I've pointed out for quite a few years now, the electorate is perfectly comfortable voting for women.
The revealing this for me is that proportionally women are over-represented among the party candidates compared to running as independents. 30 signatures and a 500 quid deposit are all it takes yet women are even less likely to do that than run within party structures. It's almost as if the parties aren't tilted against female candidates even before BS quotas.

Vestiapx

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. I'm just saying it has organically-imbued obsolescence.

That's clearly not "just" what you said, you stayed that there was a lack of female mods and that boards is a boys club.

Then you called it a chauvinistic dump.

What difference would female mods make? Would they have shut down some of the posts on this thread ? Would that not effect freedom of expression?

What exactly are you seeing that I'm missing that is so chauvinistic?

The plebs whose gender I don't know or care to know shouting boobs are not indicative of men they are so of idiots and while they might think they are funny I find ignoring them simply deflates their eagerness enough for they to scurry off.

So what's left; it seems to me that there are opinions being expressed here on both sides by men and women and that you have contributed critisim of the discussion in general but not in particular.

To me it seems, perhaps wrongly, that you wod enjoy a female umpire to whom you could appeal not because you take umbrage with a particular part of th discussion but in fact you object to the discussion itself and furthermore to the very existence of the forum in which it is hosted.


Have you ever entered a real chauvinistic forum? Pretended to be a man of the right and worked your way in to see what they talk about when they think no one is listening?
I have. Before it all moved to discord and WhatsApp groups there were open Forums that you could join and from them join more closed places where true misogyny was discussed.

What's my point !? We it's that you will not silence dissent and at least out in the light of day you can converse with those who you find disagreement with while retaining humor and temper.

JoChervil

Everything in the Universe is looking for an equilibrium.

In that way feminism is good because it also looks for it. When a certain social order was bent too much in one direction for a long time, so it needs to be bent into an opposite direction to make it straight. So it needs to be that way for some time to form a need for a "masculinism". So when it starts it will mean that we are becoming humans or whole persons then....

growleaves

“I came to Congress to represent my district, not women.” - Alice Mary Robertson

kildare lad

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. I'm just saying it has organically-imbued obsolescence.

Except when people are clearly joking or have a different opinion than me

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

johnmck wrote: »

I think it really has led women to believe they can have it all. The career, the sex in the city lifestyle, the Instagram beach photos with the tatoed surfer due in Bali, while spending 8 years finding herself upskilling to become a yoga teacher. Waiting for Clooney while posting photos on Tinder of Machu Pichu and that infamous swing, after too many weekends to remember riding the cock-carousel and then suddenly coming to an abrupt realisation around 35 /36, oh tiktok tik tok those eggs are almost all gone...

The Sex And The City lifestyle? 2008 wants its trite cliché back.

anewme

Vestiapx wrote: »

That's clearly not "just" what you said, you stayed that there was a lack of female mods and that boards is a boys club.

Then you called it a chauvinistic dump.

What difference would female mods make? Would they have shut down some of the posts on this thread ? Would that not effect freedom of expression?

What exactly are you seeing that I'm missing that is so chauvinistic?

The plebs whose gender I don't know or care to know shouting boobs are not indicative of men they are so of idiots and while they might think they are funny I find ignoring them simply deflates their eagerness enough for they to scurry off.

So what's left; it seems to me that there are opinions being expressed here on both sides by men and women and that you have contributed critisim of the discussion in general but not in particular.

To me it seems, perhaps wrongly, that you wod enjoy a female umpire to whom you could appeal not because you take umbrage with a particular part of th discussion but in fact you object to the discussion itself and furthermore to the very existence of the forum in which it is hosted.


Have you ever entered a real chauvinistic forum? Pretended to be a man of the right and worked your way in to see what they talk about when they think no one is listening?
I have. Before it all moved to discord and WhatsApp groups there were open Forums that you could join and from them join more closed places where true misogyny was discussed.

What's my point !? We it's that you will not silence dissent and at least out in the light of day you can converse with those who you find disagreement with while retaining humor and temper.

All people can do is when they witness misogny is highlight it.

Nothing to do with dissent.

Whatever WhatsApp group undercover misogynists want to join is up to them.

FunLover18

kildare lad wrote: »

Because it's feminists that keep spouting on about there's less female ceos etc. It doesn't come with sacrifice , it comes with a lot of sacrifice . If you are willing to see f all of your kids growing up go for it. Or better still start your own company and work 70 to 80 hours a week getting it going and have no life except work . I think men and women are built differently. Women are more compassionate and caring which are two traits that don't get you to the top of the business world unfortunately.

It's a very sweeping generalisation though and tbh it reads like you view raising a family as the easy option.

You mentioned earlier that men are more likely to be in business and own businesses, this is obviously a result of centuries of patriarchal society. It's a chicken and egg situation in my view and the generalisation that women aren't suited to these top positions because of their emotions doesn't help the situation and only feeds the idea of men oppressing women.

I acknowledge gender roles exist and that women and men are built differently as you said, and I don't think there's worldwide plot by men against women. Feminism to me is about questioning these ideas though and to that end I don't think we should just accept mass generalisations like women are more suited to the home and men to the workplace.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

anewme wrote: »

Sorry, but it's as clear as day in this thread,. Let's talk about boobs, burn the bras, casual sexism, throw in a bit of transphobia for good measure.

Robust discussion is fine, but you are not seeing robust discussion...its all one sided whinging and generalisations.

Who made you the arbiter? The discussion seems fine to me. You’re right about there being whingers though...

FunLover18

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Oh I agree with you. Some of it is society and expectations that it will be the woman. Some of it is men not take their share of work. Some of it is society. But some of it is choice. And biology.

I give less of a **** about overrime and my career because I wanted to see my child. I am sure there are men like that as well. But I would be fairly sure it would be more common with women. Not all women not all men. Just in general.

I think it's interesting that some people will play whataboutery with men's familial and custody rights when feminism is raised but at the same time be perfectly ok with these societal expectations, it's an interesting dichotomy when I feel (perhaps naively) that you could tackle one by addressing the other.

anewme

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Who made you the arbiter? The discussion seems fine to me. You’re right about there being whingers though...

Equating women to boobs and burning bras and secretaries is outdated is low level sexism. Adding nothing of value.

Same as whinging about trans people not being equal.

Outdated views that belong in the past and should be called out when encountered.

Live and let live seems to threaten a few people along the way.

I've read the thread on trans people, I've not commented, but I'be taken in the hate expressed there.

There are not many women engaging here. There is a reason for that as was expressed recently. I look forward to the output from Boards.ie on the under representation.

Leg End Reject

anewme wrote: »

Equating women to boobs and burning bras and secretaries is outdated is low level sexism. Adding nothing of value.

Same as whinging about trans people not being equal.

Outdated views that belong in the past and should be called out when encountered.

Live and let live seems to threaten a few people along the way.

I've read the thread on trans people, I've not commented, but I'be taken in the hate expressed there.

There are not many women engaging here. There is a reason for that as was expressed recently. I look forward to the output from Boards.ie on the under representation.

I think there was one reference to boobs and one to burning bras, both clearly jokes on the first page?

It was a woman who brought transgender into the discussion.

Boards isn't obliged to promote, nor indeed protect, feminism.

The discussion is open to all, if some women are uncomfortable expressing themselves that's a self-confidence issue they need to address.

I'm a woman and I don't see the rampant misogyny others do. You're always going to meet assholes of either gender, but that doesn't mean that misogyny and misandry are the norm.

johnmck

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The Sex And The City lifestyle? 2008 wants its trite cliché back.

They're song lyrics not to be taken too literally. Doubt it will get to number 1

kildare lad

FunLover18 wrote: »

It's a very sweeping generalisation though and tbh it reads like you view raising a family as the easy option.

You mentioned earlier that men are more likely to be in business and own businesses, this is obviously a result of centuries of patriarchal society. It's a chicken and egg situation in my view and the generalisation that women aren't suited to these top positions because of their emotions doesn't help the situation and only feeds the idea of men oppressing women.

I acknowledge gender roles exist and that women and men are built differently as you said, and I don't think there's worldwide plot by men against women. Feminism to me is about questioning these ideas though and to that end I don't think we should just accept mass generalisations like women are more suited to the home and men to the workplace.

Where have I said women are more suited to the home and were did I say raising a family was easy . I know what it's like to live with someone and raise a family, There's very few women I know that want to race back to work very soon after having a child to further their career unless they really need the money . It's feminists that try and make women feel guilty about staying home and raising a family.

Regarding your comment about women not suited to top positions, have you tried going to college and working your way up a corporation or are you just doing what most feminists do and shout from the sidelines about the " patriarchy" . Most successful women have no time for whinny feminists, I worked with two highly motivated successful women and my mam is one . Ive never heard them moan about the "patriarchy" or sexism .

Feminists have no problem with men doing all the physical or hard jobs though . Why aren't you fighting for more female binmen , bricklayers , pipe layers , roofers , steel fixers , scaffolders etc . Can woman not do them jobs aswell or just leave them for the men to do .

If you listened to feminists you'd swear we were all living in the sixties and every man spent all his time in work or the pub and the women weren't allowed leave the house.

Sir Oxman

anewme wrote: »

Equating women to boobs and burning bras and secretaries is outdated is low level sexism. Adding nothing of value.

Same as whinging about trans people not being equal.

Outdated views that belong in the past and should be called out when encountered.

Live and let live seems to threaten a few people along the way.

I've read the thread on trans people, I've not commented, but I'be taken in the hate expressed there.

There are not many women engaging here. There is a reason for that as was expressed recently. I look forward to the output from Boards.ie on the under representation.

You mean on gender identity in Ireland.

This isn't the place for it but reflect on this - is there much 'hate' on that thread or is it disagreement and differing views?

I'm reading this thread and enjoying it - points well made from differing angles.
But let's throw it all in the bin because someone said 'boobs'. In After Hours.

anewme

Sir Oxman wrote: »

You mean on gender identity in Ireland.

This isn't the place for it but reflect on this - is there much 'hate' on that thread or is it disagreement and differing views?

I'm reading this thread and enjoying it - points well made from differing angles.
But let's throw it all in the bin because someone said 'boobs'. In After Hours.

Ah, but they also must have blue hair and a nose ring, so it's a very balanced discussion!

Doctor Roast

Disastrous... But a damn fine bit of social engineering

I'd recommend a read of the feminist lie by Bob Lewis

hatrickpatrick

true-or-false wrote: »

You're confusing the gender pay gap with equal pay for equal work - they're two different issues.

This is a classic example of the problem, though - many, many feminists using hashtags and buzz words try to promote it as if they're talking about the latter, and only revert to the former when challenged. It's fundamentally dishonest though - most people would be 100% on board with the concept of equal pay for equal work, but far less so with the equality of outcome stuff feminists tend to be promoting under the guise of the former.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

This thread has it all..sexism, misogyny, transphobia...in fact, it is a case in point of what needs to be tackled by Boards Management.

This would be my absolute number one reason for opposing the modern feminism which goes beyond looking for equality - feminism which calls for censorship of views it finds offensive or hurtful. F*ck that.

anewme

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This would be my absolute number one reason for opposing the modern feminism which goes beyond looking for equality - feminism which calls for censorship of views it finds offensive or hurtful. F*ck that.

Misogny, transphobia and sexism are the opposite to equality, not sure why that needs to be pointed out.

Nothing to do with feminism, modern or antique.

anewme

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This is a classic example of the problem, though - many, many feminists using hashtags and buzz words try to promote it as if they're talking about the latter, and only revert to the former when challenged. It's fundamentally dishonest though - most people would be 100% on board with the concept of equal pay for equal work, but far less so with the equality of outcome stuff feminists tend to be promoting under the guise of the former.

The only buzzwords are labelling people as a blue haired nose ring stereotypes.

Another one: Men are in business, while women are the secretaries- another outdated stereotype.

Gross generalisations at the most basic.

Not open to change either, impacts the Agenda.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

Misogny, transphobia and sexism are the opposite to equality, not sure why that needs to be pointed out.

I agree. Censorship of them, however, is censorship. Not equality.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

The only buzzwords are labelling people as a blue haired nose ring stereotypes.

Another one: Men are in business, while women are the secretaries- another outdated stereotype.

Gross generalisations at the most basic.

Not open to change either, impacts the Agenda.

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here? I don't agree with any of the aforementioned generalisations. Never have.

FunLover18

kildare lad wrote: »

Where have I said women are more suited to the home and were did I say raising a family was easy . I know what it's like to live with someone and raise a family, There's very few women I know that want to race back to work very soon after having a child to further their career unless they really need the money . It's feminists that try and make women feel guilty about staying home and raising a family.

Yous said “women are more compassionate and caring which are two traits that don’t get you to the top of the business world” apologies, I took you up wrong, obviously there are plenty of professional roles where these traits are extremely beneficial .However there are some who would say women are more suited in the home even if you are not one of them, our constitution even pays heed to the notion. Again as I said, it reads like you’re saying that raising a family is the easy option given your emphasis on the hard work and sacrifice being a CEO/business leader takes, if that was not your intention then perhaps you could explain why you brought it up in relation to the discussion on feminism. You’re still making very sweeping statements on anecdotal evidence. I fully accept there are feminists who would denigrate women who choose to stay at home in such a way and I do not agree with them.

kildare lad wrote: »

Regarding your comment about women not suited to top positions, have you tried going to college and working your way up a corporation or are you just doing what most feminists do and shout from the sidelines about the " patriarchy" . Most successful women have no time for whinny feminists, I worked with two highly motivated successful women and my mam is one . Ive never heard them moan about the "patriarchy" or sexism .

I was referring to the generalisation that women are not suited to top positions, I do not hold such beliefs myself. Feminism has indeed made big advancements in the last 100 years but let’s not forget that they had to make those advancements. Humanity is a patriarchal society, anyone who denies that is kidding themselves but not everyone who points it out is a “whinny feminist”, it’s merely stating a fact. You said yourself “theres more men that own businesses , work in the top positions compared to women”, do you put this solely down to women’s compassionate and caring natures or do you accept that maybe there are still remnants of the patriarchy that dominated the business world before feminism.

kildare lad wrote: »

Feminists have no problem with men doing all the physical or hard jobs though . Why aren't you fighting for more female binmen , bricklayers , pipe layers , roofers , steel fixers , scaffolders etc . Can woman not do them jobs aswell or just leave them for the men to do .

I’m not fighting, I’m just trying to have a discussion. You’re literally the only person who’s brought up the woman’s struggle to be a rubbish collecor. If women want these jobs I don’t see why they shouldn’t have them. Do you?

kildare lad wrote: »

If you listened to feminists you'd swear we were all living in the sixties and every man spent all his time in work or the pub and the women weren't allowed leave the house.

Again with the sweeping generalisations. As I mentioned before, there’s very little room for nuance or actual discussion. Everything is all fine or we are living in the sixties, there's no middle ground where things have improved but feminism still has a way to go.

RWCNT

This thread makes me feel like I'm back in 2014. A good year that was.

Nice to have a retro-culture war thread and get back to basic stuff like feminism instead of gender neutral Mr Potato Head and the rest of current crop of pressing issues.

whisky_galore

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Do not post in this thread again

Ok.

Mad_maxx

Sir Oxman wrote: »

You mean on gender identity in Ireland.

This isn't the place for it but reflect on this - is there much 'hate' on that thread or is it disagreement and differing views?

I'm reading this thread and enjoying it - points well made from differing angles.
But let's throw it all in the bin because someone said 'boobs'. In After Hours.

Yep , that's how it is these days with the WOKE clergy dictating morality