Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

At work we just hired a new female conductor trainee, we can't even say "Hey guys, we have a new female employee."
I asked my boss if I should call her a male employee and he laughed, then firmly stated that we can't state genders...sigh...

Why does gender matter, you can say "Hey, guys, we have a new employee" gender has nothing to do with job performence.

because its retardedly rare that we hire female employees VERY rare, and deserves attention? The turn over rate for male employees is stupid high, we get a new male employee onc a week big deal.
after working at a place for so long you need things to talk about to break up the "same crap different day" .

Ok, so what if they are rare, male nurses are rare, but there is no need bring attention to it.
By bringing attention to it you are
1: Saying that because she is female she is inherantly different from hiring a male.
2: that because she is female she deserves attention.
3: That them lae employees should go look at her.
Now, if you hired a guy, would you say "Hey guys, we got a new male employee"

You got me.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Wouldn't that be social skills not motor skills

Yes, I would imagine that gamers have really deft hands

That could be read multiple ways, all of them naughty and pertinent to this situation.

Just as planned

 Frazzled wrote:
Women's image issues don't come from barbie. Thats a feminist bs. They come from all the magazines/pics/advertising that show concentration camp victims as models.

For the folks who put stock in it, Barbie's another example of the same kind of thing. Her proportions are even more unrealistic and idealized in an unhealthy way. The folks who complain about Barbie are worried that it's an early stage of building up an unrealistic and unreachable ideal in young girls, before they get older, start reading Seventeen, Vogue, etc.

 Monster Rain wrote:
Yep, that's pretty moronic.

This isn't a new thing, though. Some fool is always crying the blues about Barbie at least once a year.

People who care about something I consider trivial are always fools. I suspect the ladies who bother protesting Barbie might find my toy soldier hobby foolish.

The difference, Mannahnin, is when you take your foolishness to the point of annoying other people.

Particularly when the people being bothered are largely comprised of children who happen to like pink barbie houses.

Ah. I didn't realize that some fool was making a point to bother children about this issue every year.

I thought most of them just complained to other adults.

Did you read the article?

Given the target audience of Barbie, and the fact that they are protesting at the opening of the restaurant, my conclusion that they are to be bothering kids with this nonsense is defensible. The debate about whether or not Barbie is a problem is almost a separate issue at this point.

Did you? The article describes online complaints and material in Der Spiegel. It says that the group opposed to the Dream House were planning "a peaceful protest" at the opening, but as the article was written before the opening, of course no details of how the protest actually went down, or whether it did, or whether any children were bothered, were provided. Or details about protesters bothering children on other occasions, as apparently happens every year.

Oh dear...

We seem to have overlooked where I said that this case was goofier than every other time I've heard this hackneyed silliness "particularly", I used that word as I recall, due to the specific details in the article.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Women's image issues don't come from barbie. Thats a feminist bs. They come from all the magazines/pics/advertising that show concentration camp victims as models.

For the folks who put stock in it, Barbie's another example of the same kind of thing. Her proportions are even more unrealistic and idealized in an unhealthy way. The folks who complain about Barbie are worried that it's an early stage of building up an unrealistic and unreachable ideal in young girls, before they get older, start reading Seventeen, Vogue, etc.

 Monster Rain wrote:
Yep, that's pretty moronic.

This isn't a new thing, though. Some fool is always crying the blues about Barbie at least once a year.

People who care about something I consider trivial are always fools. I suspect the ladies who bother protesting Barbie might find my toy soldier hobby foolish.

My argument is based on watching these girls grow up. They seem fine right until they start reading the "girls" magazines then they go to gak.
On the positive we've found an excellent way to counteract that is put the little rugrats in sports. Active little wimminz don't got time to mess with that.

OT but am I the only to notice they seem to abbreviate all their words now. If they barked it they'd sound positively Klingon.

Angry feminists protest about something. In other news today a bear took a gak in the woods.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Women's image issues don't come from barbie. Thats a feminist bs. They come from all the magazines/pics/advertising that show concentration camp victims as models.

Written by and for almost exclusively women, and perhaps some gay men. Still doesn’t stop them blaming (heterosexual) men.

Weirdly enough women love to attack the magazine the men read that contain female models even though the women contained in those pages are far more healthy looking than the ones in the fashion mages. Yes they may be beautiful and generally slim but they never look unhealthily skinny.

 Monster Rain wrote:
The difference, Mannahnin, is when you take your foolishness to the point of annoying other people.

Just try talking about 40k around people who have no idea what it is and/or are not gamers. It would take all of 10 seconds before you are annoying them. It is like when someone goes on about their fantasy football team for hours, but then when I try to talk about my characters in SW:TOR suddenly I'm the donkey-cave. I get to have hobbies to Phil!

But I digress. I am shocked to see people on a gaming website that is probably 95%+ male use 'feminism' as a pejorative, and in such broad strokes.

 LuciusAR wrote:
Angry feminists protest about something. In other news today a bear took a gak in the woods.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Women's image issues don't come from barbie. Thats a feminist bs. They come from all the magazines/pics/advertising that show concentration camp victims as models.

Written by and for almost exclusively women, and perhaps some gay men. Still doesn’t stop them blaming (heterosexual) men.

Weirdly enough women love to attack the magazine the men read that contain female models even though the women contained in those pages are far more healthy looking than the ones in the fashion mages. Yes they may be beautiful and generally slim but they never look unhealthily skinny.

The magazines are written by women, but the models are chosen mostly by gay men. There I said it. Let the slamming begin, but if you google you'll see some flareups about it.
I think its because the designers don't want to show off the women, but want to show off the fashion. The women are just the hangers for the clothing. Its fed into a bad culture at this point. On the positive, you see a lot of the wimminz are in the post magazine era. Much like they don't listen to the radio much any more due to the Intranetz and their IPODPADGOOGLEGLASSESEARPHONEBRAIN implant devises, they don't read the magazines either.

I am unsure how a GI Joe house (bunker?) would play out in Germany. Perform military drills, make field rations, try out the "safe bullets!"tm gunnery range...

As long as we agree he is an "action figure" we can all play nice.

They are both products of a company trying to make money so I am not as hurt about the protesting: it is more their problem on how to deal with their marketing.

Agreed that something obviously for children it is unfortunate kids may see protesting but it would make a GREAT discussion for the parents to explain.

I do not like to think that a company making children's toys would preclude them from protest.

I will now go to play with my "table dolls"...

 Talizvar wrote:
I am unsure how a GI Joe house (bunker?) would play out in Germany. Perform military drills, make field rations, try out the "safe bullets!"tm gunnery range...

As long as we agree he is an "action figure" we can all play nice.

They are both products of a company trying to make money so I am not as hurt about the protesting: it is more their problem on how to deal with their marketing.

Agreed that something obviously for children it is unfortunate kids may see protesting but it would make a GREAT discussion for the parents to explain.

I do not like to think that a company making children's toys would preclude them from protest.

I will now go to play with my "table dolls"...

I don't think we want a GI Joe in Germany. Once those guys start marching, its hard to get them to stop....

 Mannahnin wrote:
I suspect the ladies who bother protesting Barbie might find my toy soldier hobby foolish.

They do, but they overlook that for my good looks!

 kronk wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
I suspect the ladies who bother protesting Barbie might find my toy soldier hobby foolish.

They do, but they overlook that for my good looks!

You sure they aren't just hiding from the cowbell

And your cowbell. Because we all know the wimminz demand MORE COWBELL!

 easysauce wrote:
the whole body image thing is silly,

if you can't look at a toy/comic/tvshow/movie actor/actress without thinking you have to look like that, then that is your own doing, not the object or fantasy.


all the ken dolls, warhammer dolls, gi joes, actors have ripped abs and steroid esque muscles, and while there is a problem with men trying to look that way through steroid abuse, that is not the fault of the inanimate objects or the fantasies on tv.

so while people abusing steroids, or being bulimic or anorexic to attain a body type is obviously harmful to them, they are the one making the choice.

it is antithetical to a free society to blame these things for individual's actions as it denies the individual's agency in decisions.

That's true (in theory) for adults but children haven't developed the skills for critical thinking that would enable them discriminate between fantasy and reality.

Otherwise we would let them smoke, vote, and drive cars, etc.

One of the differences between the common forms of male and female objectification (yes, there is a lot of both) is that generally, the buffness of male heroes is there to telegraph to us how strong and capable they are. But male heroes are almost always more than just some muscles. The muscles are like a badge that the actual person wears to show their resolve etc etc. Male heroes are people first and muscle second.

With female characters, it is often the opposite. The looks are a tool they use to GET the life that doesn't suck. They have to get the looks SO THAT they can get the guy. They have to get the looks FIRST so that they can be a full person.

This is definitely not the case in ALL media by any means. There are some really fantastic works that break out of this and I'm sure everyone here has some they can point out. This is just the prevailing status quo for good looking role model character types.

 LuciusAR wrote:

Weirdly enough women love to attack the magazine the men read that contain female models even though the women contained in those pages are far more healthy looking than the ones in the fashion mages. Yes they may be beautiful and generally slim but they never look unhealthily skinny.

Ye, I don't realy get this.

Complaint "oh, men expect women to live up to an unhealthy stereotype. Look at fashion magazines"

Most men "WTF? Give me some T&A any time".

IMO womens magazines have far more unhealth images of both men and women than mens mags, but nither are healthy.

The women in men's magazines are STILL pretty skinny all things considered, but yes, they tend to be larger than the ones in fashion mags.

That said, skinny is a natural body type that is just as valid as any other.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
The women in men's magazines are STILL pretty skinny all things considered, but yes, they tend to be larger than the ones in fashion mags.

That said, skinny is a natural body type that is just as valid as any other.

I think it depends on just how skinny you mean, and whether or not it is healthy

Thats just wrong.

Rusty the tank dog is like twice their weight.

Yup. Not a single one of those three ladies looks remotely healthy

 Ahtman wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
The difference, Mannahnin, is when you take your foolishness to the point of annoying other people.

Just try talking about 40k around people who have no idea what it is and/or are not gamers. It would take all of 10 seconds before you are annoying them. It is like when someone goes on about their fantasy football team for hours, but then when I try to talk about my characters in SW:TOR suddenly I'm the donkey-cave. I get to have hobbies to Phil! .

Well, yeah. I think being uninterested in what other people are passionate about is pretty common.

 Ahtman wrote:
But I digress. I am shocked to see people on a gaming website that is probably 95%+ male use 'feminism' as a pejorative, and in such broad strokes.

I'm not doing that.

There is a growing "plus size models" movement to counteract the death camp victim look, of which TBH is a rather extreme example seen above.

I don't think most major models like Naomi Cambell or Kate Moss look anything like that skinny.

http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/galleries/TMG9333597/Top-10-highest-paid-models-of-2012.html

That said, most top models are skinnier than most normal women.

The basic test for health is whether a woman is maintaining the weight necessary to support normal menorrhea.