Alison Redford would not be expected to be a 'nice lady' if gender roles were reverse

[Jabba 18389]

Well - I guess that reporter's opinion kind of covers all the tried & true feminist bases. Heard all of this crap more than 30 years ago...and it was old then. Guess all the reporter had to do was dig into the feminist archives eh?

 

Umm, ok - Shrug. What was the point of the article?

A man in a similar situation is a leader.

A woman in a similar situation is a bitch.

 

That's it?

That's all there is?

 

I'm going to be outrageous here & play the devil's advocate.

Let's just generally genderize politics altogether.

Men leaders are bad because they aren't nurturing women. They are tough psychopathic drunks or thugs. Let's have more leaders like Rob Ford and Adolf Hitler.

Women leaders are good because they are female and therefore nurturing. But to be a leader, females have to be a bitch and therefore non-nurturing. Let's have more leaders like Margaret Thatcher & Catherine the Great.

 

Let the mud-slinging begin.:smileysmontrefesse:

[cinelli 22184]

Totally disagree with the article.

 

She was a self indulgent arrogant jerk. She spent taxpayer's money carelessly--the South Africa trip was a disgusting display. Taking her kid's friends on trips on goverment jets shows she thinks of Crown assets as her own. Her refusal to apologise for any of this shows her lack ofcommon sense and shocking lack of political savvy.

[Guest *l**e]

I understand the intent of the article, however, I think the author chose the wrong person/situation on which to voice her views.

In this case we have a person (Redford) who is an awful person, guilty of bullying and possibly even some crimes (embezzlement). We also have a person who in his resignation is trying to be pleasant, polite, and non-inflammatory.

 

Using this situation as her focal point kind of sullies her credibility. She's basically defending the bad person at the expense of the good one.

 

I do totally understand her view, however, and there is validity to it; just not in this case.

[fortunateone 156618]

I think that had she been a man, he would have instead only said that he was "not a nice man'.

 

He probably should not have used the word lady, as I think that is what this writer latched onto more so than the "not nice' part. If we are going to dissect one phrase, and that is the phrase the article is dissecting, it would have had different results if they weren't assuming he was saying that women had to act like ladies. I doubt if that was his intention at all. I think he was trying to find a nice way of saying she is a terrible human being lol.

 

If she is, i don't know. I do know that having posted things in a feminist forum, and as a sex worker, that there are some who will latch onto one word, and ignore the other 1000 words in the post. Try giving an example of how language is used to sensationalize and manipulate people into taking up a POV, give a ton of examples, a link, and 2 or 3 quotes about it, then say that using sensationalism is a tool of some 'hysterical feminists' and the ONLY thing they will talk about is the use of the word 'hysterical' in the feminist forum.

 

Talk about sensationalism to manipulate the readers, it sounds like this writer is doing just that.