Barrister Hits Out Over Sexist Comment (article)

The post that was quoted here has been removed

As you already know, I hardly care what an emotionally disturbed child like you thinks of my internet persona.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

If these guys are really "creeps" and "perverts" and "sex pests" then something should be done about it. However, just making a passing comment about the attractive appearance of a woman does not fall into those categories in my opinion.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You can follow Charlotte Proudman's Twitter page: https://twitter.com/CRProudman/status/640934811381706752

A number of women have criticized her response on the first few pages though neither the ones who supported her or criticized her routinely state what their job is.

If you want to insist that she has unanimous or even overwhelming support for ...[text shortened]... I can't stop you, but neither you or anyone else has presented evidence supporting such a claim.

do you agree that sometimes the exact line of overreaction might be placed differently by people who are actually experiencing the plight?

if an Ethiopian is "whining" that he is hungry, an american who was never hungry in his life might not be the best person to say that he is overreacting.


looking at it from a different perspective, would you agree she might be "overreacting" to draw attention to this subject (which i think you agree is a problem), to spark discussion that might lead to better understanding or at the very least have some of these people censor themselves?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
looking at it from a different perspective, would you agree she might be "overreacting" to draw attention to this subject (which i think you agree is a problem), to spark discussion that might lead to better understanding or at the very least have some of these people censor themselves?

Honesty is always the best policy zahlardi, it's something you haven't learnt yet, but if Proudman is acting her over-reaction, I hope she is exposed. 😛

The draw back is of course she will have done immense damage to the cause against actual harassment, actual misogyny, and actual abuse.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
do you agree that sometimes the exact line of overreaction might be placed differently by people who are actually experiencing the plight?

if an Ethiopian is "whining" that he is hungry, an american who was never hungry in his life might not be the best person to say that he is overreacting.


looking at it from a different perspective, would you ag ...[text shortened]... t lead to better understanding or at the very least have some of these people censor themselves?

Her overreaction also includes publicizing a private conversation between lawyers on Twitter. It seems to me if all she was interested in was aiding her cause, she could have retained confidentiality and not specifically named the other lawyer. Her decision to breach confidentiality in this matter is rather ethically questionable for an attorney.

I do not feel that one cannot apply objective standards to a person's behavior just because one does not share some characteristic of that person.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

STRAWMAN ALERT!!!

I have already said the comment was inappropriate multiple times. Other comments to other women might be even more inappropriate and deserving of a a greater response than this one was. That, of course, has to be judged on a case by case basis.

I have not "denounced" Charlotte Proudman; I do not personalize these matters like you do. I have said that her actions here were out of line to the provocation received. Reasonable minds might differ on that assessment, but a reasonable mind does not continually heap personal abuse and attacks on those who disagree with them. You should be ashamed of doing so so consistently on this forum.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
news flash to normbenign. as humans we are a murderous species. we are keenly aware of our murderous nature from the time we read a history book. that is unlikely to change.


but the decent ones among us fukin try to abstain ourselves because we know the difference between good and evil

Yes, I agree. We can't argue with or alter our nature. Best to recognize it, and if we are offended by either sexism or murder try to avoid situations where either might effect us.

Originally posted by sh76
Only by stretching the definition to the point of irrelevancy can one argue that saying that the picture of a person is "stunning" is sexual harassment.

And by defining it down, it does harm to claims that involve real harassment.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Her overreaction also includes publicizing a private conversation between lawyers on Twitter. It seems to me if all she was interested in was aiding her cause, she could have retained confidentiality and not specifically named the other lawyer. Her decision to breach confidentiality in this matter is rather ethically questionable for an attorney.

I do ...[text shortened]... dards to a person's behavior just because one does not share some characteristic of that person.

the problem is that he didn't treat her as a lawyer, only as an object to be admired (to put it politely). as such, she isn't obligated to client (he isn't a client either) confidentiality.

i concede one point though: she could have blurred his name. in my opinion as someone who wasn't ever objectified. whose skills were never ignored and instead asked out on a date. who was never passed over for a promotion or hire because i don't have the correct genitals.

" do not feel that one cannot apply objective standards to a person's behavior"
if one disregards the special circumstances of ones behavior, one cannot apply objective standards. or better said, the standards change. the fact that you don't share a common characteristic with the person in question was meant to imply that you don't realize those special circumstances: a professional, posting her skills on a work networking site, having to deal with repeated unwanted attention that has nothing to do with work.

this particular instance was when she decided she had enough.

Originally posted by normbenign
Yes, I agree. We can't argue with or alter our nature. Best to recognize it, and if we are offended by either sexism or murder try to avoid situations where either might effect us.

yes, she could have easily avoided the sexism by not making a profile on linkedin for the purpose to find a job. is that what you are saying? it is not for the sexist pig to stop, but for the victim to avoid.

tell me, where do you draw the line? how many rights must women give up until you would be willing to stop suggesting that women should avoid these situation and instead ask the men to stop their sexist behavior?