Mr Loophole might be a good lawyer, but I can’t say I fancy sharing a courtroom with him, having read this charming piece in the Manchester Evening News in which he suggests that wayward youth can and should be tamed by a simple spot of traditional shotgun marriage, before moving on to argue that “women are frequently unreasonable when in positions of power and dealing with men” under the heading “Spare me the moods of women in the workplace“. As evidence for this proposition Mr Loophole offers the incident where one time he phoned a company and the woman wasn’t very helpful and when he rang back the man sorted it out quick as. That’s more or less good enough for beyond reasonable doubt, right Mr Loophole? But just in case you aren’t satisfied so you are sure, he goes on:
“In court, for example, lady prosecutors can be tricky, tight-lipped and complex throughout a case, while their male counterparts tend to be solid, focused, reasonable and straight to the point.“
I feel for him, really I do. It seems his daily experience is that “with women there’s always a mood, a sub text.” That must be very irritating. It’s our hormones you see. If only we could be more compliant and reasonable.
Or possibly his tendency to wear his views about women on his well cut sleeve may create a self fulfilling prophecy? Bit of self reflection required there Mr Freeman?
As the UK Legal Feminist Group notes, he’s probably a right bundle of laughs to work with. If he goes around the workplace making remarks like those contained in this article to his female colleagues he’s a potential sex discrimination claim in a suit.
Also irritating the feminist me this week, was this article featuring the perfect Ms Gwyneth Paltrow, who no doubt took her daddy’s advice, got married and went on to be a shining example of perfect womanhood before issuing the guidance from her £6m mansion that “women who want children should be stay at home mothers“. Thank you Gwyneth, could you go back to being blonde and beautiful now please? We can manage without your opinions on how we should run our lives – unless you’d like to subsidise us to stay at home, maintain a tranquil and nurturing home and cook for our men whilst they go out to hunt and gather for us?
I feel like I’ve slipped into another dimension….
Is there a difference between the genders as to how long it takes to do their 20,000 hours?
By my calculations a 37.5 hr week yields 1,665 hrs; in other words, work a year, don’t take any sick, exclude holidays and you’ve got that number of hours experience. If you did this for twelve years you’d get 20,000 hrs under your belt.
Assume the twelve years runs from age 21 to age 33: at age 33 you want to offer someone a job who has 20k hrs (and hence experience) under their belt. How would that pool be split with regard to gender?
I’d wager that isn’t the same as the pool when the entrants have just finished their degrees.
Until this question can be answered, is it appropriate to speak of sexism in the work place?
Another factor affecting the gender ratio of the eligibility pool is whether or not there is a difference as to whether or not the individual wants to be in the pool.
Again, take the 33 yr old person: is there a difference in whether or not they want to enter the eligibility pool on the basis of their gender?
For these reasons, I wonder how much discrimination is against men rather than women?
(After having said all of that though, how much does having 20k hours under your belt really matter?).
Erm…What?
The cheery thing about the Manchester story was the no. of comments that suggest it must be a spoof.
If only.
oh yeah. this week’s ‘feminism causing end of life as we know it’ story.
yawn.
or at least it would be a yawn if women didn’t have to fight its pernicious effects daily.
Ooh, they have riled you Lucy, haven’t they?
Don’t be too hard on Mr.Loophole, though; you might need him some day if you become rich and famous and get caught doing 210mph in a side street after drinking a bottle of gin.
I’m sure he can come up with some defence based on those hormones…….
Women drivers, eh?