in objecting to this obvious sexism

[bibiane]

I have been surfing the net in search of fishing trips to Puffin Island,Anglesey when I came across www. starida.co.uk which advertised fishing trips to the island. When I clicked on the Prices link I read this little gem - ' a family trip ideal for even MUM' ? Duh! To whose Mum they are referring I can't imagine. A victorian heroine of a gothic novel who swoons whenever she sets one dainty foot on a sea vessel perhaps?

My 11 yr old daughter took umbridge to this straight away and wanted to contact the company. I think an email to the North Wales Tourist Board is in order.
Is sexism alive and kicking in Wales?

I live in that 3rd world country at the moment, dealing with those harsh realities on a daily basis.

'Small' issues may be small but they still matter. If they're the issues a person e.g. the OP's daughter is confronted with in her life, why on earth shouldn't she respond to them? Writing her letter to this company does not mean that she doesn't care about 'bigger' issues too.

its only a bigger issue if it is something you believe in.

Mr Spoc "Sorry edam you have clearly missed the point. Sexism works both ways. What we are saying is that if Op takes a little point out of contaxt then surly her Ex has a very valid point by her standards."

Its not out of context when it is a clear transgression of s 1(1)(b) ie indirect discrimination under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, and the tourist board is obliged to deal with it as they get public funds to do their job.

Do you understand the complexities of how anti-discrimination legislation works? Or the distinction between indirect and direct discrimination? If so, perhaps you would like to comment on the case law that is directly in point here, which backs up the OP's post, and which distinguish it in order to prove your own point?

Had row with ex yesterday over 'sexism'. It amazes me how many people still don't get it. Including him - he thinks the title ' Mumsnet' is sexist for godsakes!

tuts, how silly is he. Doesnt he know that its totally impossible for females to even consider being sexist!

nijinsky - calm down dear.

As i said earlier. If Op is so offended by the way the company is trying to promote their company to mums not women (that would be sexist) but does not understand when her Ex husband pointed out that Mumsnet is also sexist. In other words Pot calling the Kettle Black. Or do you not see this simple hippocraccy? Not sure where you have got case law from and what your trying to achieve. Shrugs.

florencedougal - Ha ha good point.

I think you will find you mean Price v. Civil Service [1978] ICR 27 EAT Mr Spoc and are if you are trying to distinguish it, then perhaps say so, instead of indulging in your habitual meaningless name-calling? But if your brain really doesn't stretch that far, then its probably best to leave it in case you over-strain yourself. Loving hippo-craccy, btw!

MrSpoc, patronising really only works if you know what you are talking about. When ignorant people try to do it, they just make themselves look even more foolish.

Mr Spoc is an amusing chap. The definition of racism is prejudice +power; likewise sexism. Maybe you mean prejudiced? Which I am happy to state that I am. The only reason I'm posting this is to prevent yet another arrogant fuckwitted man interrupting a discussion between women on sexism