Staff outing - only ladies invited

Comms69

nicechap wrote: »

I wonder how much time & effort the outraged contributors have spent trying to redress continuing inequality.

One very simple example.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-43385303

If they've lobbied their MPs to disband or open up such an organisation to females I'd be very surprised.

Why would we do that? The state has no business interfering with this; anymore than forcing women’s aid to open its doors to men...

zagfles

Comms69 wrote: »

Why would we do that? The state has no business interfering with this; anymore than forcing women’s aid to open its doors to men...

Why do you think it's OK to discriminate against male victims of domestic violence? A social club is one thing, a charity (which presumably gets govt support) is another...

Comms69

zagfles wrote: »

Why do you think it's OK to discriminate against male victims of domestic violence? A social club is one thing, a charity (which presumably gets govt support) is another...

perhaps not the best example, as I suspect you’re correct that there is some state funding.

But then again many charities support specific causes; so I’m not too bothered about it

dekaspace

andydownes123 wrote: »

Men and women are not equal. Not even close. We are so different. We're are complimentary though of course and should be treated equally.

It's not just society that has an affect on men's actions. There are more men in prison because we have high aggression compared to women. Actually, more women attempt suicide than men, it's just as men, we have more aggression and tend to complete the act, whereas women attempt and fail generally.

I disagree on that idea on prison, women tend to get let off more often and if they are convicted they get support rather than go to prison


And a new story I read just yesterday was about a couple who lost a child, the mother got the letter from the hospital and all her friends and family gave her support and no one gave any to him, that can bottle up a lot of negative emotions with no way to release them, its not purely testosterone, it goes back to how men aren't allowed to show emotions as much.

charlotte1994 wrote: »

But bigotry does carry on. As a teenager I was discriminated against because I was a female musician, and the tutor came from bands which did not allow women. He was awful to all the girls, everyone knew it and let him get on with it. He was a grade A tw*t!! Attitudes can be passed on, there are people who still think that women shouldn't have jobs and only belong in the home like we're still living in 1895.

As a teenager in the late 90s, boys were shamed by female home economics teachers for wanting to do the class, outright told they haven't got the skills to do it and generally talked down to, boys were seen as strange by drama teachers if they wanted to do that subject even more so if they liked dancing, again by female teachers.


There was many girls only awards, events, and school even let girls in my 2nd year have a 2 week holiday where the boys were taught about how to treat a woman, which I found humiliating and sexist.


I remember in my first permanent job the female colleages teasing me and other male staff saying that as men our brains were in our trousers, men could not do any multi tasking, useless at cleaning etc. I always remember how I got a written warning for teasing a girl back and saying "yeah as a man I shouldn't have to clean" That was seen as misogyny!!!


Just remembered when I left school and went to college, not trying to stir here but my lecturer was a self proclaimed feminist, she said nasty things about males in general, but also talked about how she refused to let her then 16 year old daughter go camping with her brother and father as it was a male thing, didn't want her or let her daughter do diy and gardening for same reason, yet she had a habit of talking about equality and how hard women have it, it felt so contradictory.

happyandcontented wrote: »

I agree that the pendulum has swung too far towards female bias, and believe that young men pick up on that either consciously or unconsciously. I would hesitate to suggest that it is factored into the high male suicide rate, but if it was, it wouldn't unduly surprise me.

Young males are viewed with suspicion by many facets of society. In part, that is due to certain behaviours some of them exhibit, but it was probably always that way, but today the media hype means everyone is almost instantly aware of it.

Pinkshoes post made me think, not about providing classes designated 'female only' (although that does cause me to pause for thought) but that the reasoning she gave was that the girls were 'intimidated' by the boys and wouldn't ask questions because of it.

I find that such a classroom set up quite worrying. Surely, the optimum would be that the schools fosters a peer support ethos and so then if the girls feel that the boys have superior knowledge in any given area they can ask for help and support from them and, of course, vice versa.

In the real world, the working world, everyone needs to be able to work as a team and bolster lacks found in other team members. Everyone needs to be able to put their strengths into the mix regardless of gender. Neither sex has the prerogative on intelligence, practical ability, emotional intelligence etc, so surely it better to enable the sexes to work together from an early age rather than segregate them?

I think the intention is good but the execution of the idea is flawed.

Not looking at stirring, but something I found interesting years ago was women I knew said they liked going to gay bars just in case a man may of fancied them and dared approach them, the same women would tell a man who felt uncomfortable going to a gay bar for the same reasons was called homphobic and arrogant.


I see that as the women there assuming men automatically are a danger, and that the women thought they were something special.