To be a bit uncomfortable at phrase "willy-waving" at a conference?

[DadDadDad]

I was at a conference today in London aimed at senior people in my industry, so presenters and audience of professionals.

There was a panel discussion and one of the panellists (partner at a well-known consultancy) talked about how when some new rules were coming into the industry, some big companies were bandying about financial information relating to those rules, and then he dismissed that as little more than "willy-waving". There were two other men on the panel and one woman.

Is the phrase just a slightly jocular and vivid way of saying that companies were (somewhat pointlessly) vying with each other in showing how financially strong they were? Or was I right to feel a bit uncomfortable at the phrase (and uncomfortable for the feelings of the female panellist)? There may have been some nervous laughter at this point, but I can't really remember, and the discussion moved on without any further reference to this remark.

I'm not planning to make a fuss (the panellist doesn't work for the organisers of the conference and it was a one-off remark), but I have a feeling some of you will say I should.

(And I should probably credit MN with "training" me over the years to be a bit more alert to this kind of sexist language ).

I wouldn't have a problem with this if I was a female participant on a platform. I wouldn't use it in an email to my Bank of England regulators, but in the context of a talk where you're desperately trying to keep people from falling asleep, a bit of eye catching vulgarity can be useful. Some companies and their male leaders do engage in harmful stereotypically male behaviour, and there's no harm in calling that what it is.

But feel free to carry on "overthinking" stuff OP. Actual thinking about the impact of everyday stuff is a positive thing.

Actually ignore my last paragraph, I misread and so the thing I thought I was agreeing to in theory had not been said.

Mildly vulgar. Mildly inappropriate. Mildly unprofessional. And yes sexist- a denigrating stereotype of men

Bit rude to talk about willies I guess but a very effective phrase for cutting through bs.
Was the woman waving her metaphorical willy or was she actually just talking sense?

Was he initials ML?

*his

Can't help thinking now that the man saying about willy waving was indulging in some himself, reducing the companies he was referring to to base terms and making members of the audience (like you) feel uncomfortable by his daring words.

I think they are using it in the wrong context tbh.

Willy waving isn't really "talking about willies" though, it's an idiom. If it's a familiar phrase your brain skips straight to the intended meaning.

If you talk about "killing two birds with one stone", are animal-lovers in the audience upset?

To be honest I would judge the necessary qualifications of anyone to be speaking at a conference if they couldn't come up with slightly more sophisticated language.

It's not sexist, you can't be sexist- towards the non-oppressed group. You can discriminate against an individual man based on sex, but not the same as sexism in general terms.

Same as you can't racist towards white people. Again you can be mean towards a white person because of their race, but not that same as racism, which institutional.

Trills i know what you mean but references to genitalia are more hard hitting because they include those words. Hence being called a twat, cunt, dick, cock or whatever doesn't just automatically compute in the brain as stupid or foolish even though that's what it means; it has a jagged edge because it's conveyed using that vocabulary.

Jesus Christ, you must be permanently exhausted over thinking this stuff all the time .

It's just a saying, it's one I use when men OR women are vying for oneupmanship.

I thought he meant sexist to the women because the assumption was that the companies were run by men who had willies to wave.

It's not sexist. It is critical of a male behaviour
Similar to 'pissing contest' or 'cock fight' which mean the same sort of thing

It is a pejorative against a certain type of man who indulges in a particular type of behaviour

I did mean sexism towards women. Actually, I take on board what some have said that the phrase itself is not sexist. I was thinking more what some have highlighted that it could contribute to a sexist environment.

I have women on my team at work and I know them well enough to know they would feel a bit awkward if I used this phrase in conversation. I've no idea if the woman on the panel was embarrassed, and I'm certainly not trying to patronize her: she's far more senior than I am!

And you really don't need to be so patronising about the woman on the panel - by being there, she's shown herself to be far more competent & expert & tough than any man in the room

I don't think he was being patronising. I think it was a fair point.

Surely women can be equally guilty of willy-waving. It's a metaphor. No-one is actually waving a willy. If a plan has gone tits-up, would people without them be offended?

. If a plan has gone tits-up, would people without them be offended

Wouldn't be offended but wouldn't use the phrase "tits up" in a conference panel either

I don't think it is a problem. I am an academic and have used the phrase "intellectual cockswinging contest" in team meetings

As for the person who said they would "judge his qualifications".... ime it is admin-function types without a real deep understanding of the issues who feel uncomfortable moving away from carefully scripted "professional" terms. A good public speaker who knows their stuff will know when a colloquialism or minor piece of vulgarity will go down well.

YANBU. I work in a similar (possibly the same) industry and once had a speaker describe something as being so exciting it caused him to have a 'wet dream' in a keynote speech. I was mortified / shocked / embarrassed / distracted for the rest of his shouty presentation. He was followed by a seriously illustrious lady who made light of it but clearly shared my disdain for his comment. What a clown.

On balance I think I agree with you op. It was arrogant and willy waving and it's a term best used by women.

On balance I think I agree with you op. It was arrogant and willy waving and it's a term best used by women.

Johnny that was me. Having done a lot of public speaking I agree - jokes etc, be a little controversial, but idioms like this are just lazy and IME - when done in a panel type setting - are usually used for shock value "look, aren't I such a wag" by the person who wants to give themselves the persona of the panel comedian

From the OP's description it appears he misjudged the room anyway.

Isn't it just a bit tedious? It's on a par with "How are you diddling" "Not three bad" "I'm mad, me".................

And I agree that it's not appropriate in a professional context with colleagues you don't know.