12th December 2008, 09:18 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
I think, this is showing how and why a private (as well as public) forum is needed... like it or not.. just by being a man, it is hard to understand... as Maggie once said to me.. as I breezed on about how I loved Eastern Turkey and the sense of freedom.. and able to sit and chat...etc... "you would though.... you are after all a man... I am a woman and see a different world... walk in my shoes?? you can't... "
Rat, your inability to realise that parts of the near and middle east aren't very female-friendly wasn't because you are a man. The treatment of women is something that screams out at many travellers to that region, regardless of gender. I, for one, could see that 'different world', as much as I am able because obviously being a man I couldn't visit most forums of female social activity. Hmm...I think I'll leave the obvious comparison for readers to draw for themselves.
'Just by being a man, it is hard to understand', is complete rubbish and highly offensive, I'm afraid. To set up any organisation ostensibly working for equality on foundations of inequality is hypocritical and doomed to failure. To quote Schlesinger (taken from the wikipedia article on identity politics): basing politics on group marginalization fractures the civil polity, and therefore works against creating real opportunities for ending marginalization. My first reaction when reading this thread was to leave well alone: better not get involved as I'll get pilloried if I say anything contentious, because I'm a man, aren't I. There you go: identity politics; my genes above my ideas. It doesn't have to be that way though.
To address this issue more practically, let's take one of Underscore's examples: a lack of female toilet facilities. Like Dr Peter, I was shocked by that; where the hell does that still happen? If it does happen, it's not because Underscore (or whomever) is a woman; that has nothing to do with anything. It has to do with their company not providing adequate facilities. It's something so basic I'd have to go away and check to find out whether it's illegal; surely it'd be covered in the main contractor's method statements. What's wrong is wrong, and it isn't wrong because of the gender of those being wronged. This might seem a slim point to some, but it is absolutely fundamental.
Still no word on the BWA's take on this issue; don't they read BAJR forums?
Edited to add: I've taken so long replying that the last statement's out of date (and I'm late for work). Thanks for the post Deposit-it. Hopefully see you at TAG.
freeburmarangers.org