If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options
BBC 'run by women'
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
.
0
Comments
But the the BBC always was painfully politically-correct. It's why it's run by, and for, women and those "men" who are interested in shoes.
It's more people in general that's getting that way tbh. Most workplaces bend over backwards to cater for women, even if those women do not recognise it when it's happened. (Mainly because they don't see the benefits they get as benefits, but as their due.)
The law in general is tipped well in their favour when they get divorced, yadda yadda. Add in decline of traditional male stuff that needs hard physical graft due to replacement by machines and I am sure you all know the words by now.
As for normal jobs/the BBC, etc, well the fact remains that women still get rotten deals compared with men and get paid considerably less for doing exactly the same job. There are still far more top positions filled by men than by women and I suspect many of the 'concerns' people like Buerke have boil down to jealousy or disquiet at this 'challenge' to male supremacy.
Incidentally it is the viewers that make programmes successful. If no one cared for home and garden shows no one would watch them and they'd have been taken off the air ages ago. And men do get their testosterone-filled, boys' toys programme fixes as well. Has anyone watched Top Gear recently?
What on Earth are you on about? That the BBC is only for women and gays?
It might as well be, with its wall-to-wall soap operas and Trinny and Tranny and Garden Front in the Home and the rest of it.
Souinds great. The only problem is that most of the time in order to get anywhere, the woman must act just like a man would have done, so theres no change. Milk snatcher being a prime example. In order to be seen to be punching their weight, they have to go OTT and once that shit has worked for them, then guess what they do next?
While dictating workplace ethics and what is or isn't acceptable in most places. See MoK's arguments on the homosexuality thead about the financial side of it. i.e. they get less experience through their choices to have families etc, therefore why pay the same? Simple economics and common sense.
Yeah cos the Beeb doesn't have a captive audience does it? Oh and as for your last part, this is kind of the thing I mean. If i had said pfft it's all womens stuff, cooking and looking after kids then your post would have looked quite different. Women have made great strides into traditioanly male preserves, but us fellahs are expected to sit in our little "football, cars, porn" ghetto and stay there.
I wouldn't mind but it's not even making most women any happier.
Given you have said publicly on here you dont have a TV licence I dont see it as any of your business. And there really isnt any need to be so sneering about it.
And you should know me better than to think I'm always being serious.
Well which are you, gay or a woman?
Of course, you can always find extremist women who support extremist men. But on the whole there is little doubt that women have different priorities- and egos- to men. I believe that on the whole they're far less likely to subscribe to nationalism. And nationalism is one of the major causes of war and misery in this planet.
Sounds like feeble excuses by tight-fisted employers to me. If a woman has climbed to a certain postion through her own working abilities then she was proven herself as worthy as any male in a similar position. In fact, employers might even find out that if they paid them more decent wages perhaps fewer of them would be tempted to quit their jobs and become full time mothers.
If a programme is rubbish people won't watch it. There are other channels to choose from. Yesterday was home and garden shows, today is bleeding auction and car boot sale programmes (which you could be justified to say it's much more the domain of boring, old, white men than of women).
To suggest that we have home and garden programmes because there are many women bosses on the BBC (obviously women only care about pruning roses and keeping their homes tidy) is rather silly.
It would be debatable if we had time machines, we don't so it's not. This isn't a problem just for women of course, it's the case that all established fields have the same problem of the people at the top having to have accepted the previous way of doing things and not be that interested in changing.
Oh, and as there are no nations then that's bunnies too.
Well duh. The point is that those women who "get anywhere" must have internalised a large portion of the environment (male, professional, whatever) in order to do so. It's like Chomsky's rule about universities.
Yeah I know. You see it as based on reality I see it as a fundie belief at least we agree that it's a bad thing.
Where do these higher and going up metaphors come from I wonder? Anyway IF a woman has got a position within a company on her own merits, fine, of course she should get the same pay as anyone else. If she's had less time in the field due to family etc then she should be prepard to accept that she isn't as desirable to an employer. End of.
So it's a straight cash vs kids argument? Don't think so....
So we should be able to have hard core swedish porn on mainstream TV at 5 in the evening then.
I also never mentioned the content of programming so why this is brought up i don't know. The beeb being run by women need not show up in the product any more than a munitions factory would prduce different bullets staffed by women. It would definitely be a different place to work in though.
I agree, which is why I was drawing your attention to your "top gear" bollocks.
Anyways, not wanting to waste any further bandwidth on that issue, and trying to get the thread back together into two or three lumps (rather than a 20-piece dissection)...
Of course. But for the looks of things women do get a blanket pay discrimination regardless of whether they work full time, or even if they have a family. Underpay affects single women with no children or even partner just as much as mothers-of-four. Which ain't very fair on the former.
I wasn't responding to you regarding to programming- more to other posters who appeared to be suggesting it's because there are women bosses on the BBC that we have home and garden shows on.
Yes of course. That's got nothing to do with how workplaces operate on a day to day basis though, does it.
Could it just be that women as a group have less to offer than their equivalent males? Given that, as a group they have less experience in their various fields because as a group they have put less time in at work?
To advance us a little I would say it's both scumbag employers and lower value at work to cause the effect. If you had total equality of pay etc, you might find that still women as a group earned less because of the experience factor. Any nudging the books from that point on would be wrong, imo.
We ain't there yet though. (No time machine for me either)
Fair enough, my bad.
bollocks theyd go to war cause the other PM said something aobut her make up to her friend
As far as this quote is concerned, perhaps this is a good thing... That people are breaking free from their previous gender roles and embracing the side of them that they previously would have repressed in order to fit society's idea of a masculine male.
I don't see why it's a problem if men want to become more effeminate or that women want to wear rugby shirts and butch it up. Why can't men cry, or groom themselves? Why can't they wear nice clothes and have a sensitive side?
And what is wrong with women chosing what we want to see and hear? At the end of the day the BBC goes by how many people view certain programs rather than what one controlling woman thinks we should watch.
Like what?
Sure, robots and machines are replacing people and there are more jobs out there that are suited to women physically... But what about all the computing jobs around? I mean personally I don't know any computing students who are female, I'd imagine computing and programming to be very male-dominated still.
I think men are perfectly good at customer service and people skills.
I don't think so... Look at Top Gear, that's a car program that isn't aimed at women. All these programs like Trinny and Suzannah and Ten years Younger, all these programs and new products out put pressure on women to appear attractive rather than looking at the beauty inside them. Women do have more financial independence these days however.
I think that this is a snipe at women. There are always jobs out there suited to both men and women. Women can be mechanics and work on building sites, men can be secretaries or nurses.
my local wetherspoons pub doesn't seem to think so, they only have reaonsly attractive females and a camp black guy, most of whom cant even pull a decent pint let alone know the brands of beer they sell, whislt i know of peopel with real bar experience who are friendly and sociable who wanted that job cause it pays okay, and were refused cause theyre not suited to female customers who apparatly prefer to be served by women and camp men....
it is true though and it makes obvious sense for wetherspoons to do this, shallow men prefer being served in any business by a woman, and women feel more at ease with other women and effeminate men, so you please a larger % of people and make more money - even if they are in fact the most useless barstaff on the planet
i switched to the local lout west ham fanatisised pub run by a nice indian family who get barstaff who know their stuff even if theyre ugly :thumb:
Either way, BBC is steadily getting worse and worse. It's gonig to turn into channel 5, then 4, then ITV. But all channels are sadly beoming 4 and ITV like. I need Sky, damnit.
Yeah, they are not even repeating the Fast Show, Or and good old Comedy like Only Fool and Horses, etc... and keep on with Period Drama's which I find rather toss. As for daytime TV? Nothing on Any channels at all.
But, I can at least seek Refuge in the Documentaries on BBC and 4. And the occasional films on all channels.
So women shouldn't be earning money?
Duh, stay at home and bake cakes, clean, and have the meal ready when the man comes home and clobbers her for no reason at all. Like all good Catholic women should, if we followed the Vatican.
If I get a black eye for under cooking his potatoes I know I deserve it!
"Originally Posted by Born Slippy
... they have every right to work if they want..."
So where are they meant to work?
He also had an answer to your question. The place for a woman to work at is in the house of course, as homemaker. Keeping the house tidy and clean for the breadwinner and bringing up the children is all the work a woman should (and apparently can) undertake.
The real one is whether we actually need a 1950's dinosaur of an institution like the BBC around any more in the 21st century.
The real issue is whether we should have to pay the license fee to watch any form of television, regardless of whether we choose to watch BBC rubbish.
Only Sky has enough on to keep me watching TV more... damnit. I must get it when I move out... just wondering here... what of that thing though, were you don't need a TV license but can watch it live on your PC? Does it work?
Where ever they want to work.