Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Whinging feminists in the media
Options
Comments
-
-
-
Leg End Reject wrote: »Let's not get carried away now!
Have you road frontage?
not entirely sure what that means but I think...yes0 -
-
not entirely sure what that means but I think...yes
You're obviously a city slicker.
It's land that borders onto a road. You could build a house because you have access to the road for a driveway, if you were to sell it it would be more valuable than a parcel of land sandwiched between adjacent land or properties with no direct access.
More importantly, it was a joke!
0 -
Advertisement
-
Leg End Reject wrote: »Let's not get carried away now!
Have you road frontage?
Road frontage and all his own teeth, good catch.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »Sure, I get that, but the vast majority of people have access (along with financial supports) to third level education, or apprentice type qualifications, which boosts them far beyond what was available before. We have a society that allows a great degree of social mobility, and the laws to protect the rights of people for employment.
The myth of social mobility has always been something of a comfort to liberal ideologues tbh, those people who could afford to point out that the vast majority of people have access to all these opportunities, which ignores much of the reality that while the opportunities are there, they really don’t amount to much more than virtue signaling tokenism and an annual photo op in mainstream media for the traveller girl who graduated from Trinity with a degree in the study her own “oppression” Historically, that was called “taking the soup”. Although such initiatives are always a relatively inexpensive advertisement to attract students of a more liberal bent, they don’t actually do a whole lot for the class of people whom they are purporting to enable in becoming upwardly mobile. Precisely because the two social groups have fundamentally different sets of values.[Deleted User] wrote: »As for society itself, and how people perceive the place of women... I can't imagine it's more than an extreme minority of people (and likely quite old) who feel that women shouldn't have equality with men. Our society has shifted considerably about the place of gender in both general life, and employment. The loss/removal of religion as a constraining influence has guaranteed this.
It’s not an extreme minority of old people though, as difficult as that may be for some people to imagine. In reality, outside of academia (and Boards, where people are far more civil in how they express themselves), it’s quite obvious that the vast majority of people, both women and men, conform to the social roles which are expected of them. It’s not perceived as inequality, nor is it portrayed as inequality, it’s just an expectation, or rather - different expectations (parents start with great expectations of their children’s social mobility, before idealistic expectations give way to reality). Religion was never anything more than a handy smokescreen for individuals moral authority, a smokescreen which has been somewhat replaced by the smokescreen of identity politics in which moral authority is vested in a different sort of crowd sourcing of moral authority, enabled by the proliferation of immediate validation on social media.
That’s why for example feminism as “intersectional” is enjoying something of a resurgence in Western society, perpetuated by tech billionaires such as Melinda Gates, Safra Catz, Sheryl Sandberg and of course CEO of YouTube - Susan Wojcicki. There’s no question that they are where they are not due to any particular shift in attitudes towards women in business or tech or STEM or anything else. They are where they are because of their coming from wealthy backgrounds which enabled not just greater opportunities for better education, but also enabled access to actual social mobility and opportunities in employment. Their positions had feckall to do with feminism or encouraging more women to become €30k a year code monkeys. That’s the sort of thing they like to tell people though, because it sounds good (or rather, morally justifiable in a “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps by overcoming adversity” sort of way) - it perpetuates a belief in the system of merit - that if one wants it badly enough, and works hard enough, their place in the C-suite awaits.[Deleted User] wrote: »We've moved on. Oh, sure, there will be some people with outdated ideas, but they're going to be a minority. We've had the conditioning for decades, through education, media, politics, etc all to present us with the belief that women should be "free"... It's not a process that's still continuing.. it's something ingrained in our society now.
They’re hardly outdated idea though klaz when social stereotypes for both men and women persist, perpetuated by both men and women. For all the conditioning that some people have been exposed to through education, media, politics, etc, it’s a belief that just doesn’t map to reality.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »The myth of social mobility has always been something of a comfort to liberal ideologues tbh, those people who could afford to point out that the vast majority of people have access to all these opportunities, which ignores much of the reality that while the opportunities are there, they really don’t amount to much more than virtue signaling tokenism and an annual photo op in mainstream media for the traveller girl who graduated from Trinity with a degree in the study her own “oppression” Historically, that was called “taking the soup”. Although such initiatives are always a relatively inexpensive advertisement to attract students of a more liberal bent, they don’t actually do a whole lot for the class of people whom they are purporting to enable in becoming upwardly mobile. Precisely because the two social groups have fundamentally different sets of values.
I'm from the Athlone (which was never a wealthy town while I was there), and virtually all of my leaving cert classmates went to college/university, whereas their parents didn't. The few students who didn't, went straight into farming or the Army, since their parents were already embedded.
That's the shift in social mobility. The availability of education which provides those opportunities to break the cycle of what areas their parents/grandparents did, because there was no other choice.It’s not an extreme minority of old people though, as difficult as that may be for some people to imagine. In reality, outside of academia (and Boards, where people are far more civil in how they express themselves), it’s quite obvious that the vast majority of people, both women and men, conform to the social roles which are expected of them. It’s not perceived as inequality, nor is it portrayed as inequality, it’s just an expectation, or rather - different expectations (parents start with great expectations of their children’s social mobility, before idealistic expectations give way to reality). Religion was never anything more than a handy smokescreen for individuals moral authority, a smokescreen which has been somewhat replaced by the smokescreen of identity politics in which moral authority is vested in a different sort of crowd sourcing of moral authority, enabled by the proliferation of immediate validation on social media.
Yup. Irish people love to conform... I'd accept that.. and the social conditioning is that equality is here. Which Irish people have conformed to.That’s why for example feminism as “intersectional” is enjoying something of a resurgence in Western society,<snip>
Sorry, you're going off on a tangent that I don't see relating to my post.They’re hardly outdated idea though klaz when social stereotypes for both men and women persist, perpetuated by both men and women. For all the conditioning that some people have been exposed to through education, media, politics, etc, it’s a belief that just doesn’t map to reality.
Strange, because society and the law have done a rather good job at ensuring that social change is implemented and accepted. Try openly discriminating against women in this country, and what do you think would happen? Oh, sure, some people might take it, but the vast majority wouldn't.. because they know that they have protections in place to help.. not that I think that most people would even attempt it, because there's no value in doing so.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement