Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Higher education

Talk to other parents whose children are preparing for university on our Higher Education forum.

Another path to greatness - part III

999 replies

chopc · 23/03/2021 17:59

Here is the new thread

OP posts:
chopc · 27/04/2021 15:44

@FingernailNibbler so you decided to post on this thread because? Did it just come up on your feed and you thought you will take a gander or?

OP posts:
Stormer · 27/04/2021 15:47

@goodbyestranger

I can't see that the dictionary regards vacuousness as being reserved to girls/women. If it did, I would direct the editor to this video as strong evidence that vacuousness appears to be equally capable of being an attribute of boys/men as well as girls/women.
Yes the dictionary definition doesn’t “regard vacuousness as being reserved to girls/women”. The dictionary gives basic, bald definitions of adjectives and nouns without going into the sexist slant with which they are used. Hence the dictionary definition is largely irrelevant.

What matters here is how the word - and the word ‘vacuous’ - are commonly used in language. It’s the usage which shows bias. I am confident that you’ll find that the vast majority of the time ‘vacuous’/‘vacuousness’ is used to pejoratively describe girls & women rather than boys and men.
Especially when used in conjunction with ‘giggling’. The stereotype of airhead girls is strong, much stronger and prevalent of any equivalent for boys. It is a common way of dismissing and putting down girls/women.

In this case you purposefully used those words to dismiss or put down the girls. You say that the boys’ behaviour was also vacuous. But your first choice of words for them was ‘silly’. And you’re conveniently forgetting that you can’t compare the behaviour because the boys’ actions were pri-active; towards the girls. The girls’ behaviour was reactive. The girls didn’t start the behaviour. If the girls were holding the camera and zooming in on crotch shots of the boys, then you could compare the behaviour. Instead the video’s viewpoint was the bog standard of the term ‘male lens’.

FingernailNibbler · 27/04/2021 15:49

[quote chopc]@FingernailNibbler so you decided to post on this thread because? Did it just come up on your feed and you thought you will take a gander or? [/quote]
My post was sarcastic, as GS seemed to imply it was not a parent's business to be checking out a college to see if it seemed right for their son. I said, in that vein, much of Mumsnet is "over-involved" parents. Blush
I watch this thread because, my daughter applied to Oxbridge the year before, and a couple of my RL and MN friends have kids who applied to Oxbridge this year, and at least one is on this thread. I watch because I am wishing everyone's kids well and eager to hear about acceptances at other great unis. Smile

FingernailNibbler · 27/04/2021 15:53

I felt GS was harshly judging the poster who was initially watching the video. I watched all sorts of videos when my DD was applying to uni. I even made a spreadsheet of unis/colleges, party to help me keep them straight in my mind, as I hadn't gone to O or C and didn't know anything about colleges. Over invested? Maybe, but a fairly harmless 'hobby'. Not sure how much DD looked at all the info I gathered. In the end, she chose to apply to a college I hadn't really looked at closely. I liked a more formal one she felt didn't suit her. Whaddever. Her choice! But I enjoyed the excitement of looking at uni websites, YouTube videos of room yours etc. Harmless? Helped me feel involved in the process, and I learned a bit more about several unis, towns and her chosen degree subject/course.

FingernailNibbler · 27/04/2021 15:54

"Room tours"

hobbema · 27/04/2021 16:01

I havent been on MN for a few days, dropped in to catch up.

Leaving aside the right/wrong/ the past is a different country discussion, fascinating though it is , it took two clicks if that to find that student , his current employment etc. I find that uncomfortable. People guard their privacy closely on here by and large . Personally, if he were my son or husband I think I’d want him to know, so at least he could make an informed decision as to whether he wants to leave the video up or not. Does anyone know if MN have informed him? I’d ask anyone to earnestly consider how they’d feel if it were their son/partner/husband ? As I say, leaving aside any view on the arse-ometer.

FingernailNibbler · 27/04/2021 16:06

@hobbema

I havent been on MN for a few days, dropped in to catch up.

Leaving aside the right/wrong/ the past is a different country discussion, fascinating though it is , it took two clicks if that to find that student , his current employment etc. I find that uncomfortable. People guard their privacy closely on here by and large . Personally, if he were my son or husband I think I’d want him to know, so at least he could make an informed decision as to whether he wants to leave the video up or not. Does anyone know if MN have informed him? I’d ask anyone to earnestly consider how they’d feel if it were their son/partner/husband ? As I say, leaving aside any view on the arse-ometer.

Yeah, I deliberately didn't visit the LinkedIn page. He may be very freaked out if dozens of middle-aged women are suddenly viewing his profile... Shock
hobbema · 27/04/2021 16:12

Cant do LinkedIn.. but everything else pops up. I think its unfair.
Also, double barrelled names, so what, grow up with the assumptions on that and Mungo, it’s rightly not tolerated the other way round.

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:13

Why do posts keep being deleted randomly? There was nothing to report in quest1on's deleted post. Are we not allowed to call sexist men from the '80s 'bloody tossers' any more?

Stormer · 27/04/2021 16:15

I’m more interested in whether the girl whose boobs were zoomed in on is aware of the video being up. After all, she didn’t actively upload it. I’d hope that if the man who uploaded is made aware, he takes it down as much out of mortification for the girl having so many strangers see close-ups of her chest as for concern about the ramifications on his career. Hmm

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:17

I'm pretty sure noone criticized him for having a double barrelled name.

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:22

Quite, stormer.

hobbema · 27/04/2021 16:23

@LoonvanBoon

Why do posts keep being deleted randomly? There was nothing to report in quest1on's deleted post. Are we not allowed to call sexist men from the '80s 'bloody tossers' any more?
Yes we are, but they have a right to know and respond accordingly, no? There’s a difference between the generic and the highly specific. Maybe he will fall over laughing, (I expect it will be called a honking laugh )and regale his pals with the tale or maybe he’d be rueful/mortified/reflective. If it were you, you’d want to know, right?
LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:25

Fingernailer, I found all that (uni info) really interesting too Smile

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:28

It was generic, hobbema. It was goodbye's City colleagues/men of that ilk who were referred to as tossers in that particular post.

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:29

The Chalkly guy's video wasn't from the '80s.

hobbema · 27/04/2021 16:34

Can see at least 2 references to his name on p31 that are... disparaging. He might be an absolute wedge, I dont really care. I just think people have a right to privacy/ to respond to criticism if called out.

Stormer · 27/04/2021 16:44

You are of course free to report those posts hobbema.

I don’t agree with his LinkedIn profile being, er, linked to. That was rightly removed. But I think discussion about a video that was posted publicly to jokingly ‘promote’ a named college - knowing it would be likely seen by prospective students for years to come - is fair game.

And I note that you’re hardly advocating for privacy for the girl in the black dress, even though we don’t know if she agreed to her cleavage being zoomed in on.

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:49

I guess I do think that adults have responsibility for their own social media profiles though. This man must be pushing 30 now? It's up to him if he wants to leave old YouTube videos and Twitter stuff out there. Just a shame that it might put people off a college or university (I still don't actually get why it was called St John's open day. It wasn't filmed at an open day??).

Nobody on here used his full name after the posts were removed last night anyway.

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 16:55

I called him Mr Chalkly-Wotsit because posts with his actual name in had been removed. I could equally have said Mr Chalkly-thingy or something else similar enough to his name without leading to the actual person if you google it. If I'd wanted to be disparaging there were more obvious options.

BigWoollyJumpers · 27/04/2021 16:59

Small voice from the sidelines..... can we move on now?

LoonvanBoon · 27/04/2021 17:06

Probably a good idea, bigwoollyjumpers.

Just one point. Having been speed-reading this thread throughout the day, I only just realized when I was checking back through it now that I missed the bit about goodbye being assaulted as a child.

I'm sorry I missed that and much sorrier, goodbye, that something so awful happened to you.

goodbyestranger · 27/04/2021 17:10

Yes I can see why if your DS is not talking about unis and yet hasn't made a decision you might be fretting quest1on.

Stormer ok. I used terms which are classically associated with girls women, in a derogatory way. I had previously, quite deliberately and repeatedly, used the term silly (same palate) in relation to the young man/men. Silly is another term which tends to be applied to girls and women. But that's ok in your book is it?

hobbema absolutely about the basic right to privacy. It should have been a massive no no.

goodbyestranger · 27/04/2021 17:12

That's decent of you Loon. Good plan BWJ.

Also to bend - now it's too far back to check if I commented at the time - but very impressed by your DD's application to Bristol. That took some courage.

Stormer · 27/04/2021 17:23

Silly is another term which tends to be applied to girls and women. But that's ok in your book is it?

Not sure what you mean by this goodbyestranger.
You didn’t use “silly” for the girls despite having used it for the boys. If you had used it for the girls, you’d have been equal-handed. Instead the impression your wording gives is that you were minimising the boys’ behaviour and maximising the girls. That’s slanted. I don’t agree with your views on this. So best we move on.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.