Men Are Nothing But Sperm Donors - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-16-2005, 07:17 AM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:48 PM
What's wrong with this if the women are doing a good job? Isn't that what it's all about? This guy is complaining about nothing.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:03 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
BluRmGrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leather Heaven
Posts: 7,808
Local Time: 09:48 AM
Re: Men Are Nothing But Sperm Donors

Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Michael Buerk... The former Nine O'Clock News presenter, who now reads the news on BBC World, also said that the "shift in the balance of power between the sexes" has gone too far, saying that "life is now lived in accordance with women's rules".
Uhh... first & foremost, life is NOT lived in accordance with women's rules. It is still very much "a man's world" -- just ask some of the ladies in Afghanistan or Pakistan, etc. for some more severe examples.

Secondly, ' "the shift in the balance of power between the sexes" has gone too far'? What -- and all was well in the world before this shift? Sure... if you are a man.

Personally, I fully realize and accept that it is a man's world. Women have made great strides in the last 50 years; my grandmother couldn't imagine working outside the home, while I can't fathom not taking a job in the workplace. But it will be at least another 150 years (if ever) before a woman will be fully welcommed as a valued employee in ANY occupation, not just an acceptable subsitute for a man. And it'll take at least that long for her to be paid the same salary as an equal male counterpart.

I'm not an uber-feminist or a man-hater or anything like that. But as for this annoying prat, I say: If you're such the big, masculine specimen that you seem to want folks to believe your are, isn't whining like a baby rather, um.... girly??
__________________

__________________
BluRmGrl is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:06 AM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:48 AM
Re: Men Are Nothing But Sperm Donors

Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
At the time the programme was being made, the BBC 1 chief was Lorraine Heggessey, the channel's first female controller. She resigned in January after four years at the head of the channel.
I believe that she was also the one responsible for bringing "Doctor Who" back, so kudos to her!

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:10 AM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
All I have to say is; weh, cry me a fucking river.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:14 AM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
I see the statement that men guage themselves largely in terms of their careers as being for the most part correct.
Well, then, there you have the problem....not the fact that women are doing better jobs.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:25 AM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 08:48 AM
i think this is true.

ironically, i work for a large media company that is being infilatrated and controled by females crossing the pond from the BBC!

from what i have seen in my still limited work experience, women do tend to be better multitaskers and have smoother interpersonal skills. a general comment, but i think there's some truth there.

i would also add that the big mystery in television programming these days is "where have all the young men gone?" males in their 20s and 30s aren't watching much TV and aren't seeing movies as much as they used to, and this is a concern because they are a highly valued demographic. many people point to video games as the primary source of young male entertainment, and i think there's some truth to that, but could it be that television isn't speaking to young males anymore precisely because of this phenomenon?

just food for thought.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:32 AM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:48 AM
I think TV is crap, because network executives look at something in terms of what appeals to which demographic, rather than looking at a show and seeing if it is good. So, as a result, we have all these stereotypical TV shows that appeal to one key demographic really well.

Then, of course, they're all lame, because we have the Christian Taliban breathing down their neck every single moment, so don't dare try anything "risky," because then you'll get an FCC fine.

As a result, we've reaped what we've sowed: boring, crappy television.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:33 AM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

i would also add that the big mystery in television programming these days is "where have all the young men gone?" males in their 20s and 30s aren't watching much TV and aren't seeing movies as much as they used to, and this is a concern because they are a highly valued demographic. many people point to video games as the primary source of young male entertainment, and i think there's some truth to that, but could it be that television isn't speaking to young males anymore precisely because of this phenomenon?

just food for thought.
This is what I was thinking when I read the comment about make-overs. I'm thinking of my 18 year old brother....when he comes home from work, he prefers to crash in front of the computer and play a hunting game or online poker. When I think of myself....I like to crash in bed and watch an hour or so of TLC while I'm either cat-napping or looking at magazines. I really don't think companies as big as BBC are dumb enough to just let women take over and do makeover shows just for the hell of it. There's a reason they show what they do and it's because that's what the people watching TV want to see.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 08:44 AM   #24
Refugee
 
starsforu2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ashburn, VA (and permanently residing in u2bonogirls head!)
Posts: 2,070
Local Time: 09:48 AM
Ok I'll bite! But only to stimulate discussion, not to agree with this guy. I didn't find much of what he said to be anything more than sour grapes, and opposition to women being in the majority in any career field for the sake of being opposed to it is sexist.

The more interesting bits are the actual responses to his post, particularly in regards to the lack of equity of pay between men and women. So, I'm just going to throw this up here to stir the pot and see what everyone thinks.

Equal rates of pay for men and women. I know that statistically this is true. But is it because of inequality or is it because of other factors? Do the statistics reflect a static work force that does not take time off to have children? As an employer, do you hire a married woman over a married man in their late 20's that have equal skills? All other things being equal, you would hire the man because he is less likely to take time off to have a kid, or may be willing to kill himself as your employee, where the woman might have a child which may necessitate less time at the office. Is this sexist or is this rational? We all know that the man could become more unreliable than the woman, work less hours, take time off to take care of the child and have his work suffer as much or more than the woman, but does this occur at a rate that makes hiring a man over the woman sexist, or just smart? What percentage would make it rational and not just stereotypical? If you had a 50 / 50 chance of losing your employee to motherhood or fatherhood it wouldn't be a factor, but what if it's 70/30 chance of losing your employee or productivity. Or 80/20? Is it ever rational to make judgments like that when you hire or even promote employees? Or is it always sexist? Have fun with this one
__________________
starsforu2 is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:07 AM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Then, of course, they're all lame, because we have the Christian Taliban breathing down their neck every single moment, so don't dare try anything "risky," because then you'll get an FCC fine.
Dude, the 'Christian Taliban' or whatever you want to call them has precisely zero influence on British TV. One or two of the more conservative leaning Anglican bishops might occasionally put their heads above the parapet and complain about an allegedly blasphemous comedy routine or whatever, but they generally aren't listened to.

Your comments may or may not be true in relation to US TV but it really has no bearing on this discussion to be honest.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:13 AM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
Dude, the 'Christian Taliban' or whatever you want to call them has precisely zero influence on British TV.

Your comments may or may not be true in relation to US TV but it really has no bearing on this discussion to be honest.
It is relevant, when I'm replying to Irvine511's comment, and he works in American television--not to mention that *I* work in American television. Hence, the "FCC" comment.

So, frankly, it IS relevant, considering television is seemingly crappy on both sides of the Atlantic, and our television isn't "female dominated."

Do you catch my drift, or shall I expect another rather rude retort to my input?

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:19 AM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
It is relevant, when I'm replying to Irvine511's comment, and he works in American television--not to mention that *I* work in American television. Hence, the "FCC" comment.

So, frankly, it IS relevant, considering television is seemingly crappy on both sides of the Atlantic, and our television isn't "female dominated."

Do you catch my drift, or shall I expect another rather rude retort to my input?

Melon

No, it isn't relevant because Michael Buerk is speaking about the BBC. And Christian conservatives have no influence whatsoever on the UK television! They have about as much influence as a Tibetan monk. If television is dumbed down in the UK too (and I don't necessarily accept that it is) then the 'Christian Taliban' have absolutely nothing got to do with it. Maybe in the US they have, I don't know, but not over here.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:20 AM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:48 AM
I wasn't even talking about the BBC! Jesus Christ...

But since we're on the topic, happen to remember Mary Whitehouse? BBC, at one time, did have its own version of "Christian Taliban," but no, they currently don't have one.

This is completely besides my point.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:28 AM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
But since we're on the topic, happen to remember Mary Whitehouse? BBC, at one time, did have its own version of "Christian Taliban," but no, they currently don't have one.
Yes and they largely ignored her. She kept looking for them to tone down the more frightening scenes in Doctor Who and they rarely if ever did. So even back then the Christian Taliban had little influence.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 08-16-2005, 09:31 AM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
I wasn't even talking about the BBC! Jesus Christ...

But since we're on the topic, happen to remember Mary Whitehouse? BBC, at one time, did have its own version of "Christian Taliban," but no, they currently don't have one.

This is completely besides my point.

Melon
You use the name Jesus Christ to make a point and yet you dont believe in his story..... weird.
Totally off topic, sorry. I just found it ironic
__________________

__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com