A Study of AUNT

[amateur51]

The BBC is certainly outrageously biased on the 'liberal' side regarding controversial issues like gay marriage and feminism, amsey

As has been reported here before the majority of public opinion is firmly behind equal marriage; in fact it tends to be religiously-inspired organisations that are against it and feminism, scarcely bastions of the majority.

However I wouldn't say it was Eurosceptic or too Conservative. It generally tends to strike a fair balance, imv, though as Mr Pee has hinted programs like The News Quiz are often splattered with liberal-leftist comments and jibes.

Isn't The News Quiz a comedy programme with a satirical bias? Doesn't satire thrive on attacking 'the establishment' such as the government of the day?

I would never accuse Mr Pee of being as subtle as 'hinting' at anything - that is entirely a matter for you.

[scottycelt]

It's a bit bizarre to call 'feminism', per se, 'controversial. It aims to give women equal opportunities: on which point I see the DfE is about to step in in the case of a Muslim free (state-funded) school on the grounds that it does not treat women staff or girls as the equals of the men and boys.

The BBC, by the way, distinguishes between being impartial and being neutral. It is not neutral on equality.

It may be 'bizarre' to some that anyone else might hold a different opinion to that of oneself but surely that is what a truly free society is all about? If 'feminism' truly represents gender equality why doesn't it call itself 'equalism'?. At least that would make sense in the strive for 'equality'. Your dead right the BBC is not neutral on 'equality' it is hopelessly 'politically-correct' like so many other organisations in modern society!

Do you support 'positive discrimination' (as many feminists do) to promote this idea of 'equality'? Or do you accept that both males and females should have equal opportunities in secular society (as I do) and only the best should triumph, even if that might mean an all-male (or all-female) hierarchy?

[amateur51]

It may be 'bizarre' to some that anyone else might hold a different opinion to that of oneself but surely that is what a truly free society is all about? If 'feminism' truly represents gender equality why doesn't it call itself 'equalism'?. At least that would make sense in the strive for 'equality'. Your dead right the BBC is not neutral on 'equality' it is hopelessly 'politically-correct' like so many other organisations in modern society!

Do you support 'positive discrimination' (as many feminists do) to promote this idea of 'equality'? Or do you accept that both males and females should have equal opportunities in secular society (as I do) and only the best should triumph, even if that might mean an all-male (or all-female) hierarchy?

What do you understand by 'positive discrimination' scotty?

What do you think of the notion of creating a level playing field with regard to redressing decades of discrimination in favour of men? (which is why concepts such as 'the glass ceiling'and gender-based pay differentials exist)

[scottycelt]

As has been reported here before the majority of public opinion is firmly behind equal marriage; in fact it tends to be religiously-inspired organisations that are against it and feminism, scarcely bastions of the majority..

Amsey, you are so illogical. I suspect the polled majority public opinion in the UK is typically mostly apathetic over the issue of 'gay marriage' unlike the situation in Russia where the polled majority against 'gay rights' is so overwhelming any true democrat would immediately accept it, however unwillingly.

I would never accuse Mr Pee of being as subtle as 'hinting' at anything - that is entirely a matter for you.

Why is it a matter for me?

I merely noted Mr Pee's comment and agreed.

Nothing very subtle about it.

[scottycelt]

What do you understand by 'positive discrimination' scotty?

Er ... now let me think ... a hard one that ... maybe the promotion of the less suitable of one gender over another to create a 'gender balance'?

Nah, surely not ... anyone who believed in true equality could never subscribe to that sort of sexism, could they, amsey? :weary smile:

[french frank]

It may be 'bizarre' to some that anyone else might hold a different opinion to that of oneself but surely that is what a truly free society is all about? If 'feminism' truly represents gender equality why doesn't it call itself 'equalism'?

One reason might be that it doesn't have any particular connection with gender. On the whole, it is women who are discriminated against in so many areas of life (like equal pay for equal jobs, for example).

Your dead right the BBC is not neutral on 'equality' it is hopelessly 'politically-correct' like so many other organisations in modern society!

But ... you either are or are not in favour of equality. This is what the BBC means (I presume) about not being neutral: it favours, in a general sense, equality. That would not be regarded as a 'politically correct' view other than by those who are not in favour of equality.

Do you support 'positive discrimination' (as many feminists do) to promote this idea of 'equality'? Or do you accept that both males and females should have equal opportunities in secular society (as I do) and only the best should triumph, even if that might mean an all-male (or all-female) hierarchy?

On the whole, I'm not in favour of positive discrimination, but the concept of 'the best' can vary: how do you decide which of two candidates with equal qualifications is 'the best'? There are many men who don't like having a woman boss; for them, a man will always be 'better', which is what reinforces the male dominated hierarchy.

[scottycelt]

One reason might be that it doesn't have any particular connection with gender. On the whole, it is women who are discriminated against in so many areas of life (like equal pay for equal jobs, for example).

Feminism doesn't have any particular connection with gender? It's a very strange name in that case. It has not been my experience that women are 'discriminated against' in modern society. We could argue about that until the cows come home but if some women leave to have babies (which happens) that is sometimes reflected in pay rates. That is not discrimination but economic realism.

But ... you either are or are not in favour of equality. This is what the BBC means (I presume) about not being neutral: it favours, in a general sense, equality. That would not be regarded as a 'politically correct' view other than by those who are not in favour of equality.

I'm in favour of equal opportunity not that everyone must be regarded as the same and we should pay lip-service to the 'politically correct' concept of 'equality. For example, the BBC NEWS channel always (or overwhelmingly) has a man and a woman reading the news in turn. To any person genuinely worried about unnecessary costs at the BBC this might seem an obvious area to explore. Give the job to the person who is considered the more accomplished whether it be the man or woman. Both should have the equal opportunity to compete for that job.

On the whole, I'm not in favour of positive discrimination, but the concept of 'the best' can vary: how do you decide which of two candidates with equal qualifications is 'the best'? There are many men who don't like having a woman boss; for them, a man will always be 'better', which is what reinforces the male dominated hierarchy.

Well, on your point regarding equal qualifications that might well be a common problem for an interviewer and it's his/her job to come to a decision. Yes, there are men who don't like a woman boss but I once worked in an office with a group of five women who all agreed they preferred male authority because, in any staff dispute, the women involved were much more inclined to accept that authority. As for myself, I've worked for both and, in general, found female bosses easier to approach.

It's a funny old world!

[amateur51]

Er ... now let me think ... a hard one that ... maybe the promotion of the less suitable of one gender over another to create a 'gender balance'?

Nah, surely not ... anyone who believed in true equality could never subscribe to that sort of sexism, could they, amsey? :weary smile:

Oh good, that's saved a lot of time - you're not open to argument so I need not bother.

[amateur51]

Feminism doesn't have any particular connection with gender? It's a very strange name in that case. It has not been my experience that women are 'discriminated against' in modern society. We could argue about that until the cows come home but if some women leave to have babies (which happens) that is sometimes reflected in pay rates. That is not discrimination but economic realism.

Does you wife feel like this, I wonder?

[scottycelt]

Does you wife feel like this, I wonder?

She's not part of this discussion and thinks it's all very silly!

[amateur51]

She's not part of this discussion and thinks it's all very silly!

She's a woman and your remark was about women. As with so many men, you are an expert on women of course.

[scottycelt]

Oh good, that's saved a lot of time - you're not open to argument so I need not bother.

I think 'positive discrimination' in order to promote 'gender equality' is undoubtedly 'sexist' and indeed positively Orwellian!

Don't you?

[amateur51]

Amsey, you are so illogical. I suspect the polled majority public opinion in the UK is typically mostly apathetic over the issue of 'gay marriage' unlike the situation in Russia where the polled majority against 'gay rights' is so overwhelming any true democrat would immediately accept it, however unwillingly.

The situations in Russia and UK regarding the rights of lesbians and gay men are quite different, aren't they scotty. In UK poll after poll has shown a gradual acceptance of lesbians and gay men and the need to afford them full citizens' rights. Sadly the situation in Russia is largely stuck at the era of protest, where UK was say in the 1970s.

[scottycelt]

She's a woman and your remark was about women. As with so many men, you are an expert on women of course.

Oh heavens no, amsey. Women are different just like men. How can we be an 'expert' on others when we don't know their innermost thoughts?

Yet it has been my experience that women sometimes give birth to babies and men never do, so naturally I excluded the latter when making the remark.

Once males start giving birth whilst in employment I shall readily and enthusiastically campaign for equal pay rates for both sexes!

Get the general idea?

[amateur51]

Oh heavens no, amsey. Women are different just like men. How can we be an 'expert' on others when we don't know their innermost thoughts?

Yet it has been my experience that women sometimes give birth to babies and men never do, so naturally I excluded the latter when making the remark.

Once males start giving birth whilst in employment I shall readily and enthusiastically campaign for equal pay rates for both sexes!

Get the general idea?

Of course you wanted to discuss babies because therein lies the sole major difference. But does it explain why women who do the same job as men being paid at a different hourly rate? Really?