SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Not asked in the context of sport where the subject of mixed-sex competitions is a quite separate debate.
I'm thinking more in the context of the Presidents Club disgrace debate and then right at home the Burns Supper that I organised last Saturday.
On the latter - in the past tradition has it that a Burns Supper would be male-only - and I've attended such events at Golf Clubs in the past. But I think that is dying out - may in fact have completely died out. In my case it's a non-issue as the event was held for church project funds and I had a ceilidh dance after the meal and recitals/songs.
But on the radio this morning I heard a lady who organises many charity fundraising events and some are men-only. And why? Her rationale was that 1) in general in a relationship it is the man who hold the purse strings - and 2) men are more likely to have more money available for donation to charitable purposes. So get the men along by themselves - get them pisses up and having a great time - lovely eye-candy and all that. And empty their wallets.
Now the above may in fact be true - albeit unfortunately - but probably true. The organiser says she protects the girls who work at the event from harassment by making it clear that the girls should - there and then - report any such sexual harassment and the culprit will be hoofed out of the event and banned from future events. But she would not expose the individual publicly for fear of putting off men from going to her events in the future in case they are falsely accused...and as a result fundraising would be impacted.
Quite...
But this lead me to wonder whether there are men who go along to such events thinking that there will be lots of 'available totty' - that they will be immune from criticism of inappropriate behaviour, because if the organiser makes a stink over harassment then he will simply not donate to the charity - and clearly where the man is a wealthy individual this would seriously impact the charity
And that led me to think that the girls who work at men-only charity events know that the charity needs the attendees to have a great time so they donate a load of money - and if she complains the fundraising will be impacted. So no matter what she is told about reporting harassment - will she do so - and risk not being labelled a troublemaker and not asked to work at future events by the organisers.
I was conflicted about the sacking of the Labour Peer who attended - just attending and you get sacked? And I was also not sure about the language Corbyn has used in describing the event - it sounding way OTT. But having though it through maybe the sacking was right. He should not have gone along to something advertised as 'the most non-PC event...'
And even if he didn't quite realise the nature of the event, as soon as it became clear that there has been sexual harassment at the event in the past (there was a warning given on the menu) - he should have left immediately. And as it appears that he didn't - well that one thing changed my mind.
Men-only events? No place today. Convince me otherwise.
I'm thinking more in the context of the Presidents Club disgrace debate and then right at home the Burns Supper that I organised last Saturday.
On the latter - in the past tradition has it that a Burns Supper would be male-only - and I've attended such events at Golf Clubs in the past. But I think that is dying out - may in fact have completely died out. In my case it's a non-issue as the event was held for church project funds and I had a ceilidh dance after the meal and recitals/songs.
But on the radio this morning I heard a lady who organises many charity fundraising events and some are men-only. And why? Her rationale was that 1) in general in a relationship it is the man who hold the purse strings - and 2) men are more likely to have more money available for donation to charitable purposes. So get the men along by themselves - get them pisses up and having a great time - lovely eye-candy and all that. And empty their wallets.
Now the above may in fact be true - albeit unfortunately - but probably true. The organiser says she protects the girls who work at the event from harassment by making it clear that the girls should - there and then - report any such sexual harassment and the culprit will be hoofed out of the event and banned from future events. But she would not expose the individual publicly for fear of putting off men from going to her events in the future in case they are falsely accused...and as a result fundraising would be impacted.
Quite...
But this lead me to wonder whether there are men who go along to such events thinking that there will be lots of 'available totty' - that they will be immune from criticism of inappropriate behaviour, because if the organiser makes a stink over harassment then he will simply not donate to the charity - and clearly where the man is a wealthy individual this would seriously impact the charity
And that led me to think that the girls who work at men-only charity events know that the charity needs the attendees to have a great time so they donate a load of money - and if she complains the fundraising will be impacted. So no matter what she is told about reporting harassment - will she do so - and risk not being labelled a troublemaker and not asked to work at future events by the organisers.
I was conflicted about the sacking of the Labour Peer who attended - just attending and you get sacked? And I was also not sure about the language Corbyn has used in describing the event - it sounding way OTT. But having though it through maybe the sacking was right. He should not have gone along to something advertised as 'the most non-PC event...'
And even if he didn't quite realise the nature of the event, as soon as it became clear that there has been sexual harassment at the event in the past (there was a warning given on the menu) - he should have left immediately. And as it appears that he didn't - well that one thing changed my mind.
Men-only events? No place today. Convince me otherwise.
