Random dull video about nothing very much

[SpontaneousOrder]

I think we're all agreed on that.

With the caveat that you think that he should have apologised for his fashion choices.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Haulage firm - one that has no female drivers

Car repair shop - one that doesn't take female customers seriously.

First may have implications if they have difficulty getting staff - I'm sure Hilary Devey wanted more female drivers at her firm, the second would have implications on the bottom line.


BTW the bus garage that I use to walk pass frequently had girlie posters in the locker room until about 2 years ago. The locker room could be seen from the street which is why I could see them. I was always amused that the women who worked there were the no nonsense type who took no tulip from the men.

I wonder if maybe the assumption that 'most' women or a number significant enough to affect business is correct. Most women I know would definitely not be offended by a few girly calendars

[SpontaneousOrder]

Considering what a nasty piece of work the lady in the tweets is, I really don't see how it's got anything to do with misogyny.

Precisely. I slag off a horrible person who happens to be a woman. Accusing me of misogyny *is* horribly sexist (against women).

[mudskipper]

With the caveat that you think that he should have apologised for his fashion choices.

Only if he was sorry. Not if he was pressured into doing so.

The truth is that some people did feel unhappy by what he chose to wear. You may not agree with it, but it happened. No doubt some were trolling and wanted to 'shame' him, but most of the comments weren't like that. Very few were personal. A lot of people thanked him once he changed his shirt. If he's sorry he's upset people, then it's nice of him to say so. I watched the apology and wanted to give him a hug.

I still don't think he should ever have been in that situation - someone, somewhere should have got him to change his shirt before appearing on television.

I don't know whether he wore the shirt oblivious that it would cause controversy, wore it knowing but not caring, or wore it to provoke comment. I suspect the first, and that's a shame, as it must have soured what should have been a triumphant moment for him.

[SpontaneousOrder]

He's still whining about being banned by Cojak for promoting misogyny. The reason he continues to carp on about it is because he can't see it himself. If he keeps it up, I might ban him myself, on "Jim Moriarty" grounds.

There's a difference between whining, and pointing out the entrenched bigotry and sexism among the forum moderation. I'll refer you to, again, the actual video posted which was the purpose of my thread; Here a woman who has been involved in this for a long time now points out very lucidly the reasons why she believes that mainstream feminism is bad for both women and men, and egalitarianism in general.

Anything beyond that, including Anita Sarkeesian and the gang, is off topic and was brought up by those around here that don't like the idea of free thinking individual women with a voice of their own.

Anita recently tweeted a statement that there can be no such thing as sexism against men - so I posted it in this very thread that I started, in order to shine some light on the horrid woman that other people decided to cheer-lead, and castigate me for rebuking.

You lot do a great job of advertising your ignorance on your own - I'm just helping you along. People do notice these things, and that's all I want.

[NotAllThere]

There's a difference between whining, and pointing out the entrenched bigotry and sexism among the forum moderation. I...

There would be, if there was entrenched bigotry and sexism among the forum moderation. But as there isn't, it's just whining, mistaking entrenched bigotry and sexism for arbitrariness, inconsistency and SOism, and confusing us with people who give a toss.

[SpontaneousOrder]

There would be, if there was entrenched bigotry and sexism among the forum moderation. But as there isn't, it's just whining, mistaking entrenched bigotry and sexism for arbitrariness, inconsistency and SOism, and confusing us with people who give a toss.

It's an odd thing, isn't it? How so many people who don't give a toss seem to be compelled to repeatedly insist that they don't give a toss. Someone's even coined the term 'SOism' to describe all of those posts that they don't give a toss about yet feel compelled to read and comment on.

I think such a paradox deserves it's own term. Well done.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Only if he was sorry. Not if he was pressured into doing so.

The truth is that some people did feel unhappy by what he chose to wear. You may not agree with it, but it happened. No doubt some were trolling and wanted to 'shame' him, but most of the comments weren't like that. Very few were personal. A lot of people thanked him once he changed his shirt. If he's sorry he's upset people, then it's nice of him to say so. I watched the apology and wanted to give him a hug.

I still don't think he should ever have been in that situation - someone, somewhere should have got him to change his shirt before appearing on television.

I don't know whether he wore the shirt oblivious that it would cause controversy, wore it knowing but not caring, or wore it to provoke comment. I suspect the first, and that's a shame, as it must have soured what should have been a triumphant moment for him.

So this sounds reasonable for the most part, and for the most part is a nice way to be. But here's my problem...

While the primary backlash around the issue is related to things like this:

https://twitter.com/roseveleth/statu...39812855959552

I and many people also have a problem with even the suggestion that the shirt is in something to be apologised for - because to suppose that that shirt is insulting to women is inherently sexist (against women - and possibly men for different reasons), and to suppose that a man or woman should be concerned with causing offence to sexist people is an endorsement of sexism, and a demand that an innocent man defer his own moral integrity for the sake of another's irrationality.

So that's why (even if you don't agree with my reasoning) so many people are irritated about it - even where the criticisms were personal opinions and weren't of a bullying nature. Although of course it's the aggressive social media feminist outrage which led to things like the indiegogo campaign.

There's the idea that he was bullied, and the idea that apologising is an acquiescence to sexism. Some people are more concerned by the former than the latter.

[mudskipper]

I and many people also have a problem with even the suggestion that the shirt is in something to be apologised for - because to suppose that that shirt is insulting to women is inherently sexist (against women - and possibly men for different reasons), and to suppose that a man or woman should be concerned with causing offence to sexist people is an endorsement of sexism, and a demand that an innocent man defer his own moral integrity for the sake of another's irrationality.

That paragraph makes no sense to me at all, but as we've already established that I'm a liar, a hypocrite and a troll with significant emotional issues I guess I don't stand a chance.

You may like to reflect upon where you think the line between questioning or criticising someone's actions or behaviour morphs into personal abuse.

I find your assumption that all women harbour a subconscious desire to be objectified offensive - there is a difference between wishing to attract a mate (which probably is innate in all of us) and wanting to be viewed sexually before other attributes.

I'm not sure much more can be said about the shirt that hasn't already been said, so it's pretty unlikely that either its advocates or its detractors are suddenly going to change their opinions.

It's last week's news, and to continue discussing it long after Dr Taylor apologised presumably hoping to close the topic, seems to be doing him a disservice.

[NotAllThere]

... - there is a difference between wishing to attract a mate (which probably is innate in all of us) and wanting to be viewed sexually before other attributes. ...

This is true. But there is a part of me that's thinking "chance would be a fine thing...".

I'm just a bad person.