11th December 2008, 03:14 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by underscoreMuch of your post (particularly the patronising, double-think quote above) stinks of identity politics. I hope you judge people by slightly more diverse criteria in your daily life than has been evinced here.
er, people do actually realise that the "casting couch effect" is in itself sexist, right?
etc. etc.
As a general statement on this debate:
1)People's success isn't always proportional to their talent for the specific tasks they are employed to do.
2)The influencing factors, positive and negative, are very very varied: gender, sexuality, religion, wealth, class, charisma, adaptablity etc.
3)It is important to note that these factors are contextual to the fora in which they are applied.
4) It is important to note that these factors operate as multiple effects; nothing ever happens just because someone is a woman, or a hindu, or whatever.
I was once told that if I was a decent spin-bowler I'd have a job for life at a certain unit. Underscore, was that sexist? Would it be sexist if I [u]was</u> a decent spin-bowler?.
I'm a member of the BWA Facebook group, but that may change if all they can come up with is devisive ranting. Fortunately, thus far they seem keen to get beyond the kind of 'seventies feminist thinking that aggregates individuals into easily stereotyped groups.
Regards,
Tom
PS Underscore, don't take this personally
freeburmarangers.org