Bluestocking lock in!

and Yet. That's awful

Thanks. I'm pretty devastated. I've just realised that as an older woman this is my life now.

sorry.

Yes I have. Both in person and writing. I'm also senior to said male. But I'm in a situation where the men support him because he has a dick and the women support him because they quite like prodigal sons. Other women are threats :(

You must be raging! Have you challenged it yet? Pointed out how unmotivating it is to have your best projects handed over to someone else?

Can I vent? I've just learned that something that used to be 'mine' at work and that was marginal, but which I have built up under my own steam and with no support or resources, and which has worked well, is about to be made more flagship. I assumed that the thing would still be mine. I've just learned that it will be rebadged and handed over to a younger man who has always hated me and whose previous role used to be the flagship one, but which will no longer be under a new way of doing things. I could (am) cry with anger. It used to be that my worth as a woman was doing work that older men would appropriate to help them climb the career ladder. Now I am older I realise it is my role to work to set things up so that younger men can take them over in order to use my head as s stepping stone up the greasy pole and over me. I am so fucking tired of being female.

woman, to be fair, BME is universally used in the workplace - the fact it was a "he" isn't relevant, it's a term that everyone uses.

I would never use non-black or non-man or whatever.

Sadly now many people are obsessed with identity and labels and I think we all become less "general human" as a result which is a great shame IMHO.

I've never worked in a male dominated environment, I can't imagine having to figure stuff out in that way. That sounds quite excruciating. I've been lucky, I think, with mostly female bosses too.

NB I forgot - I like picklemepopcorn's summary of JP - much succincter than mine!!

Yes agree his insights into men are alarming but also explain a lot - I have often been the only woman in the room with what I am working on, past and present. Understanding the opposition and their vulnerabilities is a good tactic for me. I decide how to use that info but I do need to know it in the first place!!

I've started to use non-woman on here to describe TIMs etc - actually it felt good. So maybe that approach might work for you - like describe others as non-black if you are black or whatever fits. We are far too caught up in PC intersectionality speak when ordinary plain English works. Why would I be offended if someone calls me a non Black for example - would be interesting to see people's reaction.

I agree more proscriptive labelling is not the key but asking people what they need is ………simple really but never happens (or rarely).

It sucks that happened to you and most unhelpful, and infuriating I imagine. I notice it was a "he" who made that remark…..It is frustrating when people take a one size fits all approach and lump me in with others that don't need the same as I. Why didn't they just ask...

I do think we are living in a world designed and operated by robots of the male kind - where common sense doesn't feature highly - it's so enraging...

I have heard him mentioning about how men should settle arguments between men - it sounded rather alarming tbh.

thanks for the clarifications though, I really struggled to listen to him.

I didn't know about the ze etc stuff. The world really does feel entirely obsessed with rephrasing and rewording at the moment. I'm not white and I've always hated the terms that are used to described non-white. Why not just say non white - we've gone through ethnic minority, BME, some variant of BME when I was younger....

and the worst thing is it's rarely relevant. Last time someone was talking about BME communities at work it turned out he actually meant accessbility for people who don't speak English. Lumping in a whole bunch of us who have lived in England for generations doesn't help.

He is very popular at present - he reported recently he has a lot of women followers as well. I don't agree with everything he says however it's given me some deeper insights into how men operate and think. He once made an off the cuff remark that men don't know what to do with women at work - longer topic but essentially he described the completive dynamics present in many male interactions and how men can't do that with women as it involves latent aggression. I think he's probably more right than not.

Yes he doesn't speak to true equity and inclusion from our perspective - his message is for men and men seem to need it (I was remarking earlier how there's a moral vacuum in male leadership - well he seems to have spoken to that vacuum). He defends free speech and sprang to mega fame by refusing to use ze zir etc i.e. made up pronouns at an Canadian Uni where he's a Prof - it's law there you have to and he refused.

As I say his interpretation is based on Christianity - I think he's popular because the younger peeps are hearing things not taught anymore often - like morals.

His stuff re lobsters is all interpreted through his male conditioning which of course he is blind to. He's a clinical psychologist - still very black and white and doesn't speak to women's oppression etc and who he does stray into talking about women it's shocking - (he should defer to women). But at least he's trying to instil some character building stuff for guys - which is sadly lacking these days

So use his Youtubes if you want to understand guys more I would say - nothing more

He is very reflective, is happy to be challenged, and takes a fairly common sense view. He thinks men have become infantile and need to shape up if they are to be any use to women.

He does occasionally speak of what he should not- let women speak for themselves, please.

He stays really calm, believes in free speech particularly as it allows people to show who they really are and the poverty of their arguments and opinions.

woman - thank you

I am a childfree woman and one of the first things that came up in a search is that he hates childfree women - to be frank, the women who told me about him seem to be against childfree women as well - but I don't like relying on someone else's interpretation of the words.

If he is into dominance hierarchies then I can't see how he's on anyone's side? Am I being thick? Sorry re clip, I have listened to him waffle for ages and can't face more. I just wondered what the popularity was - one Tube journey across London on Sunday and I saw about 8 copies of the book (well actually there & back I was on the Tube for 3 hours!)

SpringNowPlease2018

Re JP - he's actually on our side somewhat. His message is for the last 50 years guys have become focused on their rights and have become more impulsive. He tells them to take responsible and grow up. And he tells stories to help educate them on how to do that.

Here's a video I was going to do a post on - I will if you want as he's an interesting character - his heart is in the right place however he should not talk about womens' experience at all, as his views of us are very traditional - however he is having big impact with the guys online.

Forget the title given to this video by the guy who posted it - he doesn't destroy her = they have a discussion

His stuff doesn't speak to me at all as a woman - but he seems to be filling that moral vacuum for men online - he's into dominance hierarchies and biology and his opinions on women are woeful. Many GCs dismiss him because he doesn't advocate for us - but I think he is doing an important job for guys - stopping them going too extreme and telling them to grow up!!

Deleted for derailing apparently. Though they are happy for a new thread to be started.

Random query 2, where has the 'not afraid of TRA's' thread gone?

random query

I have had two female contacts telling me about how great Jordan Peterson is

I tried to look him up but all I can hear is "blah blah"...and then if I look up other people's summaries it's "blah lobster" and they seem to be angry with him but won't say why

Then today an article appeared saying he has loads of male fans - also talks about lobsters and standing up straight etc

can anyone tell me what his message is other than "blah"? I saw the interview with Cathy Newman and didn't get much from that either. It may be because all the academic language has lost me - neo this, post that....

BeUpStanding - and what did he think of it all?

So I spent this eve in a rl pub with a dear old friend who I haven't seen for over a year. He's a gay man. We spent hours talking about the transgender debate. Hours. It was brilliant - deep, nuanced, relevant, challenging, considered. Towards the end of the night he asked me if I would go to prison to defend the biological definition of woman (and man)... and I was surprised to find myself saying yes. I would.

So, , pass the gin.

Oh sorry didn't mean to cause alarm

Think the poster meant addressing issues anyway....what a muddle.

Thanks Crow!

@IfyouseeRitaMoreno Its the ''The MNHQ Moderation team'' thread in feminist chat.

Did someone say IP addresses?! Where where? Where’s the thread?!

There's a couple of threads going on at the moment that I barely understand - re MN, trans issues, people addressing things and IP addresses.

I guess I better I have a drink....!