from Amazon
Friday, October 28, 2011
This week in sexism
I expect sexism in some niche areas, but not when it’s on the world stage, with the Olympics “recommending” women to wear skirts:
So after nearly a half-hour spent discussing WSB with this principled and highly intelligent man, I had to ask: Why, Dr. Wu?
“I have heard many times, people say, ‘We can’t tell the difference between the men and the women,’ especially on TV, since they’re in the same uniforms and are wearing headgear,” Dr. Wu said. But couldn’t AIBA have listened to the women’s concerns made clear months earlier, that such a uniform would be unacceptable? And if a different uniform is necessary, couldn’t it be, say, longer shorts?
“We have a Women’s Commission that evaluated everything and they met and gave their recommendations,” he said, adding. “The uniform was presented [in Barbados] as optional.” Does this mean it will remain optional? “After we hear about its comfort and how easy it is to compete in the uniform, it may be compulsory. But we are still working on it.”
...
One last thing. Fearing I may be getting lost in my own moral outrage, I did what I always do when I need to reality-test. I called my 19-year-old daughter and 17-year-old son into the room and told them what’s going on. “It’s about money, Dad,” said my son. “They want people to watch because they think women in skirts will get men interested.” Then my daughter added, “But it’s not true. Lots of times the people who make decisions think that everybody down here is stupid. But we’re not.” That’s right, we aren’t.
Other than having different rules (be it in sport or life) where the gender is actually a requirement (giving birth let’s say), making any rule based on gender is ridiculous. To that end, congratulations to the British Monarchy is righting a wrong, and allowing the older girl the right to succession over her younger brother.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date