Is anyone else getting " wimminned out"?

[hors limite]

I naively thought that we have been living in a 21st century of equal pay,equal opportunities and a regime of non discrimination. However, there isn't a day goes by when, as today, there are complaints. Today it's the lack of women in the top 100 best paid sports stars. I won't bore you all by reciting the incontrovertible economic facts which underpin this situation.
There aren't enough women MPs.There is a programme across the parties to encourage more women candidates - nothing wrong with that. However, that's not enough, they want women only shortlists. So they don't want to compete on a level playing field, they want discrimination in their favour.
Not enough women CEOs or women on the boards of major companies. The imposition of a minimum number on boards is being promoted.
I am all in favour of individuals reaching positions of power, responsibility and influence through the application of their efforts, talents, determination, ambition and all the other qualities that are needed to get to the top. I just can't get my head around the argument that because women were not treated equally for such a long time before the equality legislation we should now introduce systems that will discriminate in their favour. The argument seems to be that it was wrong to treat women unfairly but the way to redress the balance is to create a system which will treat men unfairly.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I have some sympathy with the workplace situation as women have been treated badly there for some years. A little realignment can be required although promoting someone who is inept purely because they are female would be plain daft. If you have two equal candidates and one is female then at the moment I can see the justification of promoting the female.

Regarding the sports people, total nonsense. You get paid what you are worth in the open market, what people want to see. If you want top pay then make your sport attractive to the public.

 

[clubchamp98]

I naively thought that we have been living in a 21st century of equal pay,equal opportunities and a regime of non discrimination. However, there isn't a day goes by when, as today, there are complaints. Today it's the lack of women in the top 100 best paid sports stars. I won't bore you all by reciting the incontrovertible economic facts which underpin this situation.
There aren't enough women MPs.There is a programme across the parties to encourage more women candidates - nothing wrong with that. However, that's not enough, they want women only shortlists. So they don't want to compete on a level playing field, they want discrimination in their favour.
Not enough women CEOs or women on the boards of major companies. The imposition of a minimum number on boards is being promoted.
I am all in favour of individuals reaching positions of power, responsibility and influence through the application of their efforts, talents, determination, ambition and all the other qualities that are needed to get to the top. I just can't get my head around the argument that because women were not treated equally for such a long time before the equality legislation we should now introduce systems that will discriminate in their favour. The argument seems to be that it was wrong to treat women unfairly but the way to redress the balance is to create a system which will treat men unfairly.

agree with this !
The big one for me is how men approach women these days .
Was just talking to my sons mates and the topic came up one lad said “ you have to be careful what you say to a woman now when you first meet in case you offend her”
Is this anyway to meet people.

He went on “ If I see a girl I like I will wait for her to say something to me”

He is missing out on the thrill of meeting people with that attitude.

Feel really sorry for lads these days they walk on eggshells.

The best person for the job should get it end of, one gender shortlist’s should be banned.

 

[Deleted member 18121]

It seems to me we're heading in the direction of "positive discrimination" again (i.e. not just women) where employers simply aren't allowed to choose who they think is best for the job, they now have to pick who according to a given quota is the best to do that job.

 

[Pathetic Shark]

The best one was the wimmin cricketers complaining they weren't getting paid as much as the men and that not so many people came to watch them.

Reason No.1 of 1. Because the standard is crap.

 

[Crazyface]

The best one was the wimmin cricketers complaining they weren't getting paid as much as the men and that not so many people came to watch them.

Reason No.1 of 1. Because the standard is crap.

As is the football and almost any sport that men do. I've worked with many many women, and can count on the fingers of one hand those I would regard as proficient in their job. Any that have been above me have been clueless.

 

[Sharktooth]

I don’t know how they get the time for sport what with all that washing up and hoovering to be done.

 

[Orikoru]

I naively thought that we have been living in a 21st century of equal pay,equal opportunities and a regime of non discrimination. However, there isn't a day goes by when, as today, there are complaints. Today it's the lack of women in the top 100 best paid sports stars. I won't bore you all by reciting the incontrovertible economic facts which underpin this situation.
There aren't enough women MPs.There is a programme across the parties to encourage more women candidates - nothing wrong with that. However, that's not enough, they want women only shortlists. So they don't want to compete on a level playing field, they want discrimination in their favour.
Not enough women CEOs or women on the boards of major companies. The imposition of a minimum number on boards is being promoted.
I am all in favour of individuals reaching positions of power, responsibility and influence through the application of their efforts, talents, determination, ambition and all the other qualities that are needed to get to the top. I just can't get my head around the argument that because women were not treated equally for such a long time before the equality legislation we should now introduce systems that will discriminate in their favour. The argument seems to be that it was wrong to treat women unfairly but the way to redress the balance is to create a system which will treat men unfairly.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I despite anything that says you must include a female candidate or someone of colour - knowing this is in place, will that person feel like they were the best candidate for the job? Or just the best female/black candidate? I don't think it's the right way to go down at all. If someone is the best candidate for something they should have every chance of getting the job/whatever it is - but anything else is too far the other way.

 

[IanM]

BBC Breakfast on in hotel this morning... most of the programming while I was eating was "Wimins Issues"
- getting the vote (valid)
- equal pay in equal jobs (valid)
- shops not being consistent in their sizing causing Wimin emotional issues!! (really?)

Heck, I am a large in UA, a medium in Ashworth, and a XXL in Super Dry. So bloomin what... I haven't gone on the BBC to fret about it.

BBC are really loud about womens' rights ... until of course some real "cultural" misogyny appears... then silence. Massive silence.

 

[Orikoru]

The best one was the wimmin cricketers complaining they weren't getting paid as much as the men and that not so many people came to watch them.

Reason No.1 of 1. Because the standard is crap.

Indeed. As with football, the pay is at least some way weighted by the audience and fans it draws in. Far less people want to watch the female versions of these sports, so less money generated. Quite simple.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I've worked with many many women, and can count on the fingers of one hand those I would regard as proficient in their job. Any that have been above me have been clueless.

Not had any clueless male bosses?

Before being my own boss I had more female bosses than male, met plenty of female directors. All utterly competent and I learnt from each of them. You get good and bad in both sexes, that's life. You can't make a sweeping generalisation and it have credibility.

 

[Scoobiesnax]

Not had any clueless male bosses?

Before being my own boss I had more female bosses than male, met plenty of female directors. All utterly competent and I learnt from each of them. You get good and bad in both sexes, that's life. You can't make a sweeping generalisation and it have credibility.

Agree with you here. My example being the better half. She is a director in one of the regions of a National House Builder. She has come from the bottom and has reached a remarkable level. I am extremely proud of her and what she has achieved. The ones who come across as clueless are usually the B*llsh*tting fist pumping/chest beating males who I deal with regularly as I work for a subcontractor in the industry. If they had an ounce of my Mrs working talent they'd be very lucky! She is the breadwinner in the house by some distance and long may she continue to flourish in her role

 

[USER1999]

I am surprised someone like Serena Williams is not in the top 100. You wonder how far down the list you have to go before you find a woman.

 

[USER1999]

Apparently Serena dropped out due to getting sprogged up.

 

[Hacker Khan]

So essentially a lot of white middle class men are feeling threatened as women may get some preferential treatment that many of them have enjoyed over centuries. There seems to be some very insecure people on here......

 

[Hacker Khan]

As is the football and almost any sport that men do. I've worked with many many women, and can count on the fingers of one hand those I would regard as proficient in their job. Any that have been above me have been clueless.

#everydaymisogyny

As 'doing a job at work' seems to be out, care to list any areas in which you feel women are quite proficient?

 

[Beezerk]

So essentially a lot of white middle class men are feeling threatened as women may get some preferential treatment that many of them have enjoyed over centuries. There seems to be some very insecure people on here......

Not really, anyone who hasn’t noticed the BBC’s massive “pro woman” push recently must have been on mars, just discussing it that’s all I see.
I couldn’t really give a hoot either way but if someone got an interview ahead of me because they ticked a certain box to fill a quota, well then I’d be annoyed.

 

[Sharktooth]

#everydaymisogyny

As 'doing a job at work' seems to be out, care to list any areas in which you feel women are quite proficient?

Nattering, shopping, nattering whilst shopping... the list goes on

 

[Orikoru]

So essentially a lot of white middle class men are feeling threatened as women may get some preferential treatment that many of them have enjoyed over centuries. There seems to be some very insecure people on here......

I haven't enjoyed anything 'for centuries'. I'm only 31.

 

[User20205]

So essentially a lot of white middle class men are feeling threatened as women may get some preferential treatment that many of them have enjoyed over centuries. There seems to be some very insecure people on here......

This^^^^ just because inequality is recognised doesn’t mean it’s addressed.