Good Old Fashioned Sexism, '70's Style, From Virgin Trains.

[ALunerExplorer]

Virgin Trains responding to highlighted sexism with... more sexism. The non-apology apology will be arriving at Platform 2 as scheduled.

Ms Cole herself said "I wouldn't have complained if he'd used the term in a familial or affectionate way. It definitely wasn't that."

I use Virgin East coast quite regularly both to London and Aberdeen. If they are more than 30 minutes late I get money back. I rarely need to be there for a specific time so it is now more annoying if they are 10 or 15 minutes late than 30. They are almost never on time.

I think women can absolutely tell when it isn’t intentional and will let things that discomfort them go because they know the other person doesn’t realise how they come across
Yesterday I bought a fluffy jumper in the sale - lovely and soft and snuggly it is.
When I went to pay the male manager said 'ooh lovely, I can tell you just want to sit somewhere and be stroked'.
I just said 'uh, yeah'.
I could tell by the tone of his voice he was just trying to make conversation and happened to come out with something really dumb.
Sorry, nothing to do with this really, just had to tell my slightly amusing story.
Derail, derail.

I think women can absolutely tell when it isn’t intentional and will let things that discomfort them go because they know the other person doesn’t realise how they come across

Of course they can. Ms Cole did. I'm a regular user of East Coast first class and it is not unusual for the attendants to use terms in the friendly way she refers to.

Mate and pal are more unisex imo I would be very surprised to be addressed as "mate" or "pal" and would not like it.

That's not a derail. That's just the ebb and flow of conversation, perfectly in context

I have a nickname that only family members refer to me as occasionally as an affectionate term. If a stranger started calling me by this nickname I would think it was really odd and inappropriate.

Well, yes because a stranger can't glean your nickname from just looking at you. I guess it's just something I don't get and having been brought up where being friendly and affectionate to a stranger isn't an abhorrent act.

Christ, work conversations with you must be pretty uncomfortable!
You'd have to ask my colleagues that. I'm not uncomfortable when one of them calls me 'my love' so I wouldn't have thought calling them anything else endearing would be particularly hankie gripping.

Being called "honey" by someone in a work/customer service situation in response to a complaint clearly isn't being friendly and affectionate. It's obviously patronising. Then compounded by an obviously sexist/patronising official response from Virgin. Then followed by the usual non-apology that makes it clear that anyone who doesn't like what they said is unnecessarily offended.

This is one of millions of male dominance displays that are normalized in our culture. Normalized to the point where the woman who objected was mocked.

Christ, work conversations with you must be pretty uncomfortable!
You'd have to ask my colleagues that. I'm not uncomfortable when one of them calls me 'my love' so I wouldn't have thought calling them anything else endearing would be particularly hankie gripping.

Yes, but you implied that there's no difference between someone friendly calling you 'my love', and some other person calling you something more personal - when there obviously is.

Actually, if my director called me 'my love' in a work conversation, I would think it a bit odd. Down at the pub, fine, but in a professional context, a bit over the line - and bare in mind I work with my partner sometimes, and wouldn't expect him to use endearments when we're working together either.

I'm feeling conflicted at this debate. Not at the Virgin reply. That passive-aggressive attempt at humour is out of order. But the use of a gendered term. Where I'm from, bus drivers always add love to the end of every sentence to a woman or girl. It's like a reflex and it had never really registered until someone from out of the area laughed at the charming local lingo. It is a gendered term. Bus drivers never day love to men (at least, I think so, or perhaps, do they? I've never paid attention). It is not in the least patronising - it's just like a verbal tick. But it (probably) is targeted to the female sex. Does this in and of itself make it sexist? Obviously the physical differences between men and women are clear (at least, for the vast majority). Isn't a gendered term just recognising that difference? I'm unsure.

I don’t expect a national organisations frontline staff to use local terms that some think of as endearing. Neither do I believe it depends on tone. I have a name it can be used or appropriate formal address.

Reminds me of this song

On the general point of use of "love", "pet" etc and not specific to this case: what to another may seem a localism is that person's normal. Firstly why must we all be homogeneous and secondly who gets to decide what's ok?

The idea this person is an oppressed by an interaction with a rude staff member IS ridiculous to me. I think that maybe mine is not an unusual reaction and perhaps that fueled the ridicule of her.

Who said she was oppressed? Patronised is not oppression.

Ridiculing a woman for not wanting to be patronised by a massive company is desperately unpleasant.

Ridicule in this case is raising an eyebrow.

So you mean "mildly critical" not "ridicule on twitter"

I mean personally I find her escalating this ridiculous, this I would express in a train via a raised eyebrow and it would end there. Twitter is what it is and surely noone can be surprised by reactions on there if they use it!

Not meaning to disparage Twitter users : There would be plenty of support for her viewpoint too no doubt as there is here.

I now notice that even I decided the train employee was rude when in fact I wasn't even there. Hmm.

I wonder why she would lie about the train employee being rude to her? Maybe she was just after some unnecessary compensation and some attention? That's much more likely, no doubt.

Has any one said she was lying about his being rude?

From her description of what happened his response to her was rude , with or without the "honey"

"I now notice that even I decided the train employee was rude when in fact I wasn't even there. Hmm."

I took this to mean that @WindyWindy now feels that there is no reason to believe this women as there is no impartial witness to verify what was said. So the women was probably lying for some reason about what was said to her. And therefore that Virgin's official response was reasonable and proportionate to someone trying to lie for compensation/attention/whatever.

No I meant I'm looking at my own reaction which was to assume the middle aged male railway employee probably was a miserable unpleasant so and so. I should try to be fairer.

As for lying : no, my default would be to assume both people will see an interaction through their own lens.

Oh goodness. I just took it to mean that Windy was reassessing whether it was justified in taking it further- not that it wasn't rude.

I really cannot stand it when people in a professional customer facing role use any of these terms.

I know a painter and decorator and was discussing an issue similar to this and he said he wouldn't dream of using those terms. His view is to keep it strictly professional. It's doable.

The tweet from VT was a disgrace.

I'm not sure what the point is that you're making? You think this man probably did say something like what was reported to this woman, but she misinterpreted it and decided because of her (feminist) lens that he was being sexist and patronising? And Virgin's response was fine, just humorous and again misinterpreted?

(How do we know the Virgin employee is middle aged?)

Plus, we both agreed that there were certain assumptions about certain professions saying this. So not just sexist but classist too. No one expects their doctor/consultant to call them Pet or Honey.

((How do we know the Virgin employee is middle aged?)*

Ms Cole (27) described him as "older male train manager". I'd assume she would not describe someone who was merely 5 or even 10 years older than her as "older".