This still going on?
Out of interest, why are you framing this woman's Facebook posts as an "embarrassing twist"?
Out of interest, why are you framing this woman's Facebook posts as an "embarrassing twist"?
Because she thinks she can say what she wants about other people but goes OTT when someone pays her an ordinary complement and tries to make out that he did something awfully wrong.
Because she thinks she can say what she wants about other people but goes OTT when someone pays her an ordinary complement and tries to make out that he did something awfully wrong.
You forgot to add that you pay compliments to other women in front of your wife.
And people like you are saying I should be punished for doing so. What utter bollox.
Yep, that's exactly what I've been say. Oh, hang on. No. It. Isn't.
So if it is OK for her to do it and OK for me to do it why isn't it OK for him to do it?
Do you think we should have used "hypocritical"?
I think you should have used "inconsequential".
You've conflated two completely unrelated facts to try and give "balance" to the story. Her Facebook comments are irrelevant. You may as well say that it would be an "embarrassing twist" to find out that someone who complains about being groped at work wasn't a virgin.
I would call it shoddy reporting, but it's not even that. It's just a lazy relaying of someone else's shoddy reporting.
Careful Simon, you will be labelled a sexist misogynist soon by the white knight brigade.
You're certainly cocksure.
And you don't like listening to reason.
Comparing sexual assault to comments on social media seems a very poor taste analogy. And one that doesn't really translate well.
Both comments were on social media websites. Both arguably objectified the opposite sex - though people will disagree as to what degree they objectify, as well as the suitability of the environment the comments were posted.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison to make. And one that it is absolutely justified to make in the interests of balance.
However, if the bigger issue here is the objectification of genders and the undermining of professional standing - I'd suggest this public spat wasn't the correct way to progress that debate. Seems to me there are many much more constructive ways of approaching that subject and adding value to the discussion.
The whole point of this debate is the context in which the comments were made. You understand that's literally all there is to this, right? So to try and throw in similar comments made in completely different contexts is completely meaningless. What we say to each other in a personal environment among friends is completely separate to what you should expect in a professional environment with strangers. I can't honestly believe I have to explain that again, but apparently I do.
If you're really interested in "adding value to the discussion", drawing these false comparisons to try and undermine the person who started it doesn't seem like a good place to start. But hey, you enjoy those clicks.
The whole point of this debate is the context in which the comments were made. You understand that's literally all there is to this, right? So to try and throw in similar comments made in completely different contexts is completely meaningless. What we say to each other in a personal environment among friends is completely separate to what you should expect in a professional environment with strangers. I can't honestly believe I have to explain that again, but apparently I do.
If you're really interested in "adding value to the discussion", drawing these false comparisons to try and undermine the person who started it doesn't seem like a good place to start. But hey, you enjoy those clicks.
Would another question be if the reaction would be the same if it was a man who looked like the blokes off Facebook she liked the look of who had said it?
You mean a bit like his comment about his daughter?
It would be inappropriate whoever said it. Her reaction would be as irrelevant as your question. This is about defining what's appropriate conduct in a professional environment, not trying to matchmake randoms on the internet.
Why would her reaction be irrelevant? Surely it would / should be exactly the same whether it is the Elephant Man or Brad Pitt?
We all know that Brad Pitt would get away with it. But it wouldn't make it any more appropriate for him to try.
So surely if that was the case, the woman kicking off about being judged on her looks etc would be judging on looks / age etc?
In your magical, hypothetical scenario, then yes. But I don't think it's a great idea to say that we shouldn't condemn sexism because there's a chance women could enjoy it if the perpetrator happens to be a supermodel.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?