To report friend to FB for photo of her blacked up?

[Greyhound]

I'm really shocked - cousin of mine has pic of herself on Facebook blacked up. She is white. The picture is of her at a fancy dress party - she has covered her face in dark brown stage make up and is wearing an "Afro" wig and Rastafarian style striped hat.

Her husband is also blacked up.

Probably the fact that he is male did help him Pistol.

Have you heard of intersectionality? It is the idea that people can be disadvantaged in a variety of ways, and that those disadvantages intersect and interact with each other.

For example, Buffy's FIL was working class, so that was an area of relative disadvantage for him, but he had male privilege, and if he is straight and white (I don't know this) then they would also be areas of privilege for him. So he would be working with only one area of disadvantage.

However, a woman in the same position would also be disadvantaged by her femaleness, and if she were disabled, or a lesbian, or non-white, then those areas of disadvantage would intersect to make it relatively harder for her to achieve the same class mobility that Buffy's FIL was able to.

These are issues which feminists grapple with every day. We don't just sit about hating men, but look to structural discrimination, and how we can work to create a fairer system for everybody.

I would imagine a non-white disabled lesbian would do very nicely in any area in modern British society today. See? Nothing to grapple with any more

Really? You don't think she would encounter extra barriers, when compared to, say, a white, able bodied male.

Have you ever seen the CV experiment? Identical CVs were sent to employers with one crucial difference - half had male names, half female. The male names were significantly more likely to get an interview than the females.

Interesting isn't it? After all, we've all got equal opportunities nowadays, haven't we?

Then what I suggest the females do is attach a photo of their tits to their CV's.

Yes. That'll sort it.

There was doubt?

What is the point of engaging with something like that ^^

X post - that was directed at Pistol's latest little gem.

Sorry Buffy!

Don't worry, I'm laughing my head off. I'm in that kind of mood. On a serious note, I blame the parents; they will insist on giving their daughters frivolous names like Poppy and Sabrina. What feminism needs is more Brendas and Marjories. You don't mess with a Brenda.

Was anyone worrying about Pistol? Thought not.

Some excellent posts & also some great reading recommendations Buffy - appreciated .

Maybe you could try not to be such a twat and we could actually get on OK?

That is some presumption, Buffy, love, that I actually am just dying to get along with you

Sorry. That was unnecessary. I've had enough of this now. Nanight.

Have you ever seen the CV experiment? Identical CVs were sent to employers with one crucial difference - half had male names, half female. The male names were significantly more likely to get an interview than the females

And when was this done? I'm involved in the selection process of our trainees. There are many factors we look at (quality of degree and from which university, spelling and grammar, peculiarities in secondary education such as good science subjects but no Higher English, simply not boring me rigid , but gender? Irrelevant.

you do realise that structural sexism at works means that you've likely had to show that you are more brilliant and dedicated than your male colleagues in order to overcome the additional barriers women tend to face, right? It doesn't detract from your achievements, it enhances them. I think, anyway.

Ah , I wondered when that one would come up. Well it's tosh too. Don't you get it? Whilst I'm limiting myself to talking about my industry the bottom line is law firms want people who are good at the job, deliver high quality work on time and to the clients' expectations. No one's career will advance if they can't deliver that.

I am quite often surprised that people whose jobs (at least in my head) involve critical thought and evidenced based arguments - don't seem to understand critical thought and evidence based arguments!

I have made it quite clear I am talking about my own profession.

I'm quite surprised at Buffy insisting that I must have experienced "systemic discrimination"; I must have had to try harder than a man to get my partnership; men are given preference in allocating interesting work; cvs are vetted and women weeded out. It just doesn't happen. Have any of you worked in a private practice law firm?

We had trainee once who was a "mature student" who made it known she was pursuing an employment tribunal case on the basis of sex discrimination against a former (non legal sector) employer. She kept a work diary and we used to see her noting down how her day was going. We treated her the same as any one else although she decided 9 months into a 24 month contract law wasn't for her and went to work for a bank. Her work up to that point was mediocre and she would not have been retained unless there was a big improvement. Last we heard of her she was pursuing the bank at a tribunal as well. Oddly she didn't even attempt to call us out on discrimination despite actively looking for it.

As for the example of the solicitor who was too dim to carry her ID pass in an out of office hours situation- oh of course she must have been discriminated against for being a woman as opposed to having been challenged for being dim.

I am an ex-private practice lawyer. I have worked in a magic circle firm and in two large national firms. I have definitely witnessed a huge amount of sexism in the legal profession. I am agog that anyone would suggest that it simply doesn't exist for lawyers!