Blott

Gender equality

68 posts in this topic

At a recent corporate all day briefing we (employees various) were brought up to speed with the various improvements and updates regarding our corporate forward strategy and operating systems various. I know it sounds tremendously boring but it was actually a very interesting a varied set of presentations, the pros at this sort of thing know how to make it fun as well as informative.

The assembled invitees were split almost 50/50 male and female, the presentations were delivered, every last one of them by ladies, not a male presenter to be seen.

Now before anyone starts thinking here we go, misogyny feast coming up. Far from it i've been clear in my opinions many times on these pages, I hold no discrimination, be it gender, race, colour, creed or sexuality. As long as the person in question is good at their job or at least trying their hardest i'm cool. Away from work i'd add a provision, as long as the person remains within the law as we understand it i'm equally cool.

Back to the corporate briefing, the all female presenters were either heads of department or assistant heads as far as I know. Having looked at our employee gender split our latest figures show 52% female 48% male. Therefore I can conclude gender equality is good, slightly in favour of females by a few percentage points. 

However, we have an enormous back office, admin, clerical and managerial teams where most of the female employees reside. The site work side of the business (there are no figures to refer to) is almost completely male. As regular readers will know, I build houses for a living so you can imagine the usual work requirements, other sites do other things but they are almost completely male staffed also.

So we can see gender equality has been achieved in the areas of work which could be described as clean and none physical. Not so in the areas which can get dirty and sweaty for want of a better word. In the coming years I can see the clerical side of businesses up and down the land achieving similar levels of equality very quickly, if not an imbalance in favour of females.

So what of the side of the business which is almost completely male orientated, I know people who are much cleverer than I are working hard to recruit females into the areas which are predominantly male staffed but with little success. It may be previous attitudes still reign in the minds of some, banter and Micky taking etc etc is part of daily life but (on my jobs anyway) there is a limit which I will not allow others to cross. And to be honest of the ladies I know banter is just as prevalent and given in equal measure.

So in the quest for gender equality in the work place, will it be an equal split in the clean (usually) office/clerical/design based jobs while the less desirable jobs remain the preserve of men or will women seek genuine equality and start filling the posts traditionally seen as male?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I look forward to the feminist campaign to achieve gender equality among refuse collectors but I'm not holding my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine it's difficult for some people to talk openly about gender equality, scared they will appear to be backing the wrong side. However, in matters such as workplace equality I feel we should seek true equality not piecemeal equality. Not a dip in and out of it campaign, cherry picking the nice bits and ignoring other parts. I'm intrigued as to the thoughts of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have several friends who are builders. They all have buggered backs.
Maybe women are simply a lot smarter than men Blott.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true one must look after one's back while carrying out physical work, however, modern tech helps remove a lot of the that.

Curious you say maybe women are smarter than men, imply women (mostly) shun the jobs which can be viewed as physically difficult. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very much in favour of gender equality but I still cannot understand why females can still be paid less than their male counterparts for doing the same job...the BBC being one of the worst the media would have us believe although i do believe that this has now been partly rectified but more by the male employees taking a voluntary salary cut to achieve equality. Why didn't the BBC do this and how was it that there was pay gap to start with? The other thing that annoys me is that for a female to achieve the same status on the corporate ladder why does said female have to be (in most cases) much better than her male counterpart? If she can do the job how does this work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jimmy too said:

Whoops, Blott.

I'm sure the poster was flattered but I'm not so sure about the lady you thought posted.

Whoops indeed, Flutterby and Violet please accept my full apology for mixing up two of our best loved correspondents here on SHQ forums. 

In my defence I made the post pre morning coffee when the grey matter was still in sleep mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Blott said:

Whoops indeed, Flutterby and Violet please accept my full apology for mixing up two of our best loved correspondents here on SHQ forums. 

In my defence I made the post pre morning coffee when the grey matter was still in sleep mode.

Hmm...….. the ice is getting a little thin, blott. Will this man recover to his previously exalted position?:58674be6ca98e_EmojiSmiley-15:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the term 'gender equality'. I believe the best person possible should be picked for a particular job. Period. I will say absolutely the old paradigm of women for being qualified for certain jobs should be re-evaluated. But when Blott mentioned this 52-48 split it seemed more like attempting to maintain a work force 'equal' to the male/female proportion in the area. It should be the 'best' person, not the most needy or a person of a particular race or sexual status. If our civilization is to survive we must advance the best people, not the ones we feel sorry for, or those in need. However, systematically, we must bring all ethnic or minority person on an even playing field with us crackers. But this hiring based on filling a quota is bs. The people in the UK as well as us in the US have gone to the hospitals, gov agencies, and seen incredibly stoopid people attempting to perform work that is way over their head.

Only yesterday, I was having a discussion with a deputy sheriff in my township. And we were having a dialogue. After I was handcuffed we were discussing rather mundane aspects of life, and I stated that I didn't like the idea of women officers going out on patrol. Nor did I like women in the military going out into the field. He stated that, in his experience, he would have preferred women as back-ups than certain men. I told him that was an understandable comment. And that reliable personalities covered women as well as men. But if I had to choose a police officer as back-up, I would want one not only attentive, but one able to physically do some damage to a perp. Because, for the most part, these cops patrol by themselves. He then tightened the cuffs even further to make coherent conversation virtually unbearable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, flutterby said:

Why would I want equality...

Not sure I could lower myself that far.

:58674c04d4507_EmojiSmiley-68:

 

I have been waiting to say this. A little while back you commented on the pics of a woman and said something about the beauty of youth. I have always thought you were, and still are, one very hot lady. Don't ever think otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Blott said:

It's true one must look after one's back while carrying out physical work, however, modern tech helps remove a lot of the that.

Curious you say maybe women are smarter than men, imply women (mostly) shun the jobs which can be viewed as physically difficult. 

I can't say. However about a decade ago I was very heavily into cycling, and took a year off (part time) to get into shape for an event. As part of my training I took up a yoga class on a Tuesday morning. At the class one day the one other male attending sidled up to me and asked if I could see now why women lived longer than men. He made a good point. Women are smart. Men were out killing themselves at work, women were enjoying a languid stretch. Go figure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trinity said:

I can't say. However about a decade ago I was very heavily into cycling, and took a year off (part time) to get into shape for an event. As part of my training I took up a yoga class on a Tuesday morning. At the class one day the one other male attending sidled up to me and asked if I could see now why women lived longer than men. He made a good point. Women are smart. Men were out killing themselves at work, women were enjoying a languid stretch. Go figure. 

Interesting observation, therefore can we deduce workplace equality has an awful long way to go and not just in comparable pay but in comparable duties. Also from what you've said above, might I dare to say women might like to step up to the difficult tasks and give the poor guys a break :58674be8724ed_EmojiSmiley-18: it happened in the war years with the Ladies Land Army so why shouldn't it happen now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rowlf said:

Hmm...….. the ice is getting a little thin, blott. Will this man recover to his previously exalted position?:58674be6ca98e_EmojiSmiley-15:

Hmm, i'm as fallible to mistakes as anyone and everyone. However, it is my opinion the measure of the man or woman is their ability to acknowledge errors and be strong enough of character to issue apologies when necessary.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Blott said:

Hmm, i'm as fallible to mistakes as anyone and everyone. However, it is my opinion the measure of the man or woman is their ability to acknowledge errors and be strong enough of character to issue apologies when necessary.  

Yep, I agree. And the apology must be deserved and be heart felt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked in automotive electronics, we had one woman that was really good as an Engineer. She seemed to be good at her job, but then decided that it was a much better life being a Project Manager, which in our Company was more like a secretary. I found most women would rather do the administration tasks, rather than real engineering, but perhaps they saw that had a better future. The trouble is, and don't get me wrong, I have the greatest respect for a woman than can do a job as good as a man, like the woman that fixed the Spitfire carburetor flooding,  but in my engineering company many woman got promoted, because of positive discrimination, which devalued the women that were really capable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, ruby said:

I worked in automotive electronics, we had one woman that was really good as an Engineer. She seemed to be good at her job, but then decided that it was a much better life being a Project Manager, which in our Company was more like a secretary. I found most women would rather do the administration tasks, rather than real engineering, but perhaps they saw that had a better future. The trouble is, and don't get me wrong, I have the greatest respect for a woman than can do a job as good as a man, like the woman that fixed the Spitfire carburetor flooding,  but in my engineering company many woman got promoted, because of positive discrimination, which devalued the women that were really capable.

Hmmm, positive discrimination huh. The clue is right there in the words, discrimination. Positive or otherwise it's still discrimination, putting people into positions unfairly simply to tick a box or look good on some report of near fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Blott said:

Hmmm, positive discrimination huh. The clue is right there in the words, discrimination. Positive or otherwise it's still discrimination, putting people into positions unfairly simply to tick a box or look good on some report of near fiction.

I think you miss the point though Blott. Positive discrimination is required to get things into some sort of equilibrium. It's pointless talking about equality when one side has all the resources, all the power and so on. It's like you and I playing Monopoly except you start with Mayfair and Parklane already loaded with hotels and you're calling it an equal game. 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Blott said:

Hmmm, positive discrimination huh. The clue is right there in the words, discrimination. Positive or otherwise it's still discrimination, putting people into positions unfairly simply to tick a box or look good on some report of near fiction.

 

6 hours ago, Trinity said:

I think you miss the point though Blott. Positive discrimination is required to get things into some sort of equilibrium. It's pointless talking about equality when one side has all the resources, all the power and so on. It's like you and I playing Monopoly except you start with Mayfair and Parklane already loaded with hotels and you're calling it an equal game. 


 

Very similar to SHQ in a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Trinity said:

I think you miss the point though Blott. Positive discrimination is required to get things into some sort of equilibrium. It's pointless talking about equality when one side has all the resources, all the power and so on. It's like you and I playing Monopoly except you start with Mayfair and Parklane already loaded with hotels and you're calling it an equal game. 

First, I thought the two most expensive properties were Boardwalk and Park Place. Second, I don't want women to be 'equal'. I want to be different than a male. Some (most) better than me. Others struggling..... Way too often we place too many people in positions they are not qualified for. This is a bad thing. Especially went it comes to protecting the public. Here in the US I feel that women should be paid the same as any other person for doing the same job. But when you start promoting people to positions they are not qualified for, you're just dumbing down our entire society. We need to learn from society's leaders, not the other way around. OJT is not a good idea for upper management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trinity said:

Agreed. 

Bloody hell! It must be the heat, so I'd better lie down.

I could have sworn there, for just a minute, that you had actually agreed with me.

Many thanks anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been reading how long the Mens Singles Semi Final tennis matches took to finish at Wimbledon and how short the Ladies Singles Final lasted. Equal prize money is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Augustus said:

Just been reading how long the Mens Singles Semi Final tennis matches took to finish at Wimbledon and how short the Ladies Singles Final lasted. Equal prize money is a joke.

Are you suggesting players be paid on an hourly rate? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trinity, I am just stating the fact that the Men's Wimbledon Champion will have had to work much harder than the Ladies Wimbledon Champion. The truth is the Ladies tennis event at Wimbledon is the undercard for the men's tennis event. In boxing those taking part in the undercard bouts don't get paid the same as the two boxes involved in the main fight. In golf, the winners of the ladies majors only get only a fraction of the prize money won by the men in their majors and nobody complains. I don't have a problem when a television network choose a pretty female weather forecast presenter rather than a male weather forecast presenter to tell us the weather forecast. I don't have any problems at all, if any employer gives a female a job instead of a man because they are easier on the eye. In my opinion all this gender equality lark is a load of politically correct nonsense, because as my Grandma used to say "What you gain on the swings, you lose on the roundabouts"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Augustus said:

I am just stating the fact that the Men's Wimbledon Champion will have had to work much harder than the Ladies Wimbledon Champion.

And as Andy Murray pointed out a while back, that gives the ladies the opportunity to play in the doubles as well and earn even more money.

But really comparing the Hollywood salaries of BBC employees and top athletes has very little to do with the real world that most women (and men) have to live and work in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tennis equality has been hashed out many times in various media. Wimbledon made the decision to award equal prize money to matches that are unequal in duration. Therefore, an equality purest would argue by doing so they may be promoting inequality (when looked at without emotion equality has to mean all things equal). 

Serena Williams (I think it was her) has stated she would lose every-time if she were drawn against Andy Murray (when they were both world number 1), therefore even the top athletes agree the two disciplines are not the same. 

However, as far as I know Wimbledon are free to award prizes as they see fit and as such I don't suspect they are contravening any equality laws. They may be trying to make a point regarding positive discrimination, if so that is up to them.

Nature has made it such male bodies generally out perform female bodies in sporting events, that is how it is and can't be changed. Money plays the biggest factor in these events, the big prize money usually goes to the athlete who sets the best time, wins most matches etc etc and of course a sport wouldn't last long if it had no one to support it/watch it. It has been suggested the ladies tennis game if it were a stand alone event would not receive as much money and support as the men's game, this suggestion has in some quarters been roundly denied, tellingly though, the event organisers are loath to test the suggestion.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Blott said:

Tennis equality has been hashed out many times in various media. Wimbledon made the decision to award equal prize money to matches that are unequal in duration. Therefore, an equality purest would argue by doing so they may be promoting inequality (when looked at without emotion equality has to mean all things equal). 

Serena Williams (I think it was her) has stated she would lose every-time if she were drawn against Andy Murray (when they were both world number 1), therefore even the top athletes agree the two disciplines are not the same. 

However, as far as I know Wimbledon are free to award prizes as they see fit and as such I don't suspect they are contravening any equality laws. They may be trying to make a point regarding positive discrimination, if so that is up to them.

Nature has made it such male bodies generally out perform female bodies in sporting events, that is how it is and can't be changed. Money plays the biggest factor in these events, the big prize money usually goes to the athlete who sets the best time, wins most matches etc etc and of course a sport wouldn't last long if it had no one to support it/watch it. It has been suggested the ladies tennis game if it were a stand alone event would not receive as much money and support as the men's game, this suggestion has in some quarters been roundly denied, tellingly though, the event organisers are loath to test the suggestion.   

 

Shouldn't the men simply get the skills to finish the job sooner?
I know a tennis player who was on the circuit at the time Steffi was cleaning up women's tennis. He was at best ranked around 100th in the world. I asked if he had ever played Steffi, to which he replied, "many times... beat her easily". He said women had difficulty with the power of the men's serve. I digress. 
 Anyway what about golf. What a stupid sport. The prize money dolled out is completely irrational but I doubt we'll hear Augie making too much fuss about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gummi Bear said:

Are you telling me that people get paid hard cash - for playing golf?????

Hard to believe but yes it's true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually what this thread points to is simply this.  Men sit around all day watching sport. And dumb sports too. Like golf. Tennis. Drag racing.  Sad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/07/2018 at 10:36 AM, Gummi Bear said:

Are you telling me that people get paid hard cash - for playing golf?????

I must be doing something wrong because I only get paid hard cash when I am not playing golf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Augustus said:

I must be doing something wrong because I only get paid hard cash when I am not playing golf.

Might want to work on your improving your handicap then. Perhaps less time reading your Grandma's book of great quotes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how women are only seeking what they call "equality" now there,s no chance of them having to work on coal faces timbering up large roof fall,s or working in thin coal seams in a foot of water

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, magnadet said:

Funny how women are only seeking what they call "equality" now there,s no chance of them having to work on coal faces timbering up large roof fall,s or working in thin coal seams in a foot of water

I've said it before, women are smarter than men. The fact that men spend countless hours watching golf on television proves it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Trinity said:

I've said it before, women are smarter than men. The fact that men spend countless hours watching golf on television proves it.

I never watch golf , I find the concept of hitting a ball with a stick boring beyond words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, magnadet said:

I never watch golf , I find the concept of hitting a ball with a stick boring beyond words

You find watching all sports boring then? 🤔👀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Trinity said:

I've said it before, women are smarter than men. The fact that men spend countless hours watching golf on television proves it.

Which side of the fence are you on in all this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Gummi Bear said:

Wait a minute while she addresses her balls.

You're so amusing. A tranny joke disguised in a perfectly reasonable comment. You're good !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hand on heart I fully subscribe to equality. In my varying careers as a police officer, transport manager for an American oil company and finally a G4S prison officer each one has subscribed to equal pay and equal opportunity. In the police women officers excelled at the caring, counselling compassionate side of incidents and I'm not being patronising ! Come Saturday night and a large scale drunken brawl breaks out it's a different matter. Apart from the odd female officer built like the proverbial they are a liability, male officers are distracted by a perceived need to protect their female colleagues and I've seen 3 women officers being bounced round like rag dolls trying to hold on to a particularly frisky drunk. As for opportunity the MET have a women commissioner the highest rank in the land. Unfortunately her appointment reeks of tokenism, her incompetence in overseeing a high profile anti terrorist operation resulted in the execution of John Charles Demenez by a MET firearms officer.

As a transport manager I worked for what I considered an enlightened company, every member of staff attended annual team building and career development seminars. These were held in good quality hotels in different parts of the country. The reality was that women field based staff were offered promotion but that required shift work, outside work in often arduous and inclement conditions and so these jobs were declined. Field staff could apply for head office jobs but that would require a (company assisted) move so unless the female was very career minded there was in effect a limit in female promotability.

In the prison service I worked for G4S in a brand new state of the art male prison. The officers were both male and female and I valued having a female shift partner. With just two officers on a wing of 95 prisoners they had a calming and stabilising effect negating some of the machismo posturing between officers and prisoners. Most of the female officers had no interest in promotion they were working to bring a second income in or were single parents. For a while my line manager was a women, she replaced two male managers and did an excellent job. Promotion was ability based in all roles administration, managerial and operational. The one drawback was the obvious one female officers with 95 sex starved men resulted in outrageous flirting, two of my female shift partners were sacked for sexual misconduct with prisoners. To sum up women are more than equal to men but often in a different and unique way more suited to their gender.

P.S. the only time I saw stockings was in my early service as a plod, never as a prison officer and memorably my office cleaner at Conoco always wore black stockings to work. If I was working evenings I got a flash for making the coffee.

John B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now