Charlotte Proudman

[JeanSeberg]

www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/08/charlotte-proudman-alexander-carter-silk-linkedin-photo-comment-law-firms

Good for her.

JAPAB wrote - "You cannot deduce that I hold "contempt" for someone just because I behave towards them in a way you do not agree with. I could disagree with you that it is wrong, just be ignorant, be lacking in social awareness, or just have a skewiffy sense of propriety."

One is less likely to treat people with contempt if one makes more of an effort to minimise one's ignorance and lack of social awareness, but I know that some people just find it much easier to make excuses instead, and to treat women's rights as a "debate".

Proudman explained herself why it's misogynistic:

'The eroticisation of women's physical appearance is a way of exercising power over women'

As an isolated incident, in a vacuum, you may have had a point. In a patriarchal society where women's appearances are policed, commented on above all other aspects (e.g. politicians' shoes), rated out of ten for fuckability and all the other shitty little things, it's not just 'not agreeing' or 'not liking' some behaviour. It's yet another example of men thinking they have the right to say these things to women, completely uninvited. It betrays their own ridiculous thought patterns that a) women's purpose is predominantly decorative and b) men have the right to treat them as such. This is the very basis of objectifying women. It is treating women as not full human beings. That's the contempt.

I have mixed feelings. It's career suicide for her.. perhaps.. because sexism is so entrenched and women are very much hated.

On the other hand, it's wonderful that she thinks the way she does and I feel relived that women like her feel so strong about sexism that they speak out. Specializes in FGM as a human rights lawyer. She's full of integrity. I hope this helps her career, not hinders it. I will be interested to see how this pans out for her.

While I think what he said was sexist and particularly stupid. She contacted him first, it wasn't unsolicited or uninvited.

The Linkedin business connection wasn't unsolicited or uninvited. The sexism and misogyny, however, certainly was.

As an aside, I once looked into doing a masters in human rights. The old white guy who ran the course arranged a meeting with me. I was nervous and young. He looked me up and down, told me the way I held myself wasn't confident enough and therefore he wouldn't be happy with me on his course.

Right.

So a person who is a member of a political class with the most power on the planet and teaches human rights thought if fitting to look down on somebody who was not a member of the ruling political class ( a woman) and chastise her for not holding herself confidently enough.

To give you an idea of the kind of thing Proudman must deal with all the time...

If I ever have need of a human rights lawyer, I'll be calling on Proudman. She isn't afraid to stand up for what she believes in.

And really? Linking in on a professional networking site is inviting some bloke to comment on her looks? Really?

I can't be bothered with LinkedIn but everyone has to have a profile on it. I was looking at hers late on Thursday night and one of the groups she is a member of is some obscure socialist group.

I clicked on it and by mistake added myself as a member- which would not be appropriate for my profile. I couldn't remove myself on the mobile site and blasted laptop was in the process of downloading endless Microsoft updates. Finally disengaged from the group at just after 2 a.m.

We were talking about it in the office. Reactions from 2 of my female partners and 1 female assistant were he is in the wrong but her way of dealing with it was wrong too and it would put them off instructing her.

Mide, have you ever used LinkedIn?

I don't have a profile on there Yonic, no.

Ok. Asking to connect is more akin to writing an email introducing yourself than it is connecting on FB. More to follow...

Fair enough Yonic I understand and I'm not excusing his behaviour, just don't think it can be called unsolicited. Not that it really matters.

So if I sent an email to you saying "Dear Mr Mide, I am writing to enquire if there are any opportunities for Mide Inc and Screwdriver Ltd to work together. Please visit www.screwdriver.web to learn more about our team and our services and drop me a line if you'd like to follow up, yours, YonicScrewdriver"

Then any response from you saying:

"I looked up your team and saw your photo, this is horrendously politically incorrect but what a stunning photo"

Would absolutely be unsolicited as it is thoroughly outside of the context of my contacting you.

SAKTURA - reference to "The old white guy " could be construed as agist and racist by an overly sensitive old white guy. Ms Proudman was absolutely justified in making the comments she did but NOT going public on Twitter any more than this old white guy is going public on Ms Sakura's potentially agist and sexist views. Ms Proudfoot, rightly or wrongly, has been portrayed as vindictive because she had the linguistic firepower to flatten her "Adimirer" but chose instead to name and shame. It's a tragedy; she'll live to regret this and may well end up in a bin next to Cherie Blair. It'll be long remembered by those with clout and influence, that she's trouble. The adage 'it's not what you know but who you know' is at the centre of the legal profession

She knows and will come to know quite a few influential people who woukd admire and respect her all the more over this episode, I'm sure working under Michael Mansfield QC will trump publically embarrassing some solicitor. And like many have said, pissing off the Daily Mail is a huge plus for many.

And I'm sure Cherie Booth QC doesn't feel like she's in a bin and had a failed career, even if Cherie Blair wasn't liked by certain sections of society.

I really don't think she will be short of work because of this. Maybe some people will be put off briefing her but those working on forced marriage and other women's rights related cases, which is clearly her preferred area, are more likely to be impressed by her stance.

Can I just say how much I love the irony that she has an inbuilt response to the "tut tut, why are feminists worrying about such minor things when forced marriage and FGM exists?"

The most disapproving of her amongst my female colleagues thought it was an engineered publicity stunt to increase her public profile.

To put this indcident in a personal context if she was my sister or close friend I'd be horrified how hard she had worked to then face this nonsense. I'd also conversely be extremely proud that she tackled it head on.

If however the guy was my dad I think I'd have to change my name, it was cringe inducing embarrassment.