I’m not really sure I understand the outrage – did they expect the employers to discriminate based on gender and only accept female applicants?
You could argue that a man might be less able to connect with women on the issue, but hardly to the degree that it automatically disqualifies them from the job.
I’d like to see the cogs in their heads turning, if a trans women was hired. Would outrage then be justified or transphobic?
People should be more outraged that such a role exists at all.
It sounds more like a logistical / project management role in getting sanitary products to the women who need them. What’s the issue?
Jesus £36k p/a
The title is the worst aspect I think.
There are also male gynaecologists who spend their days getting far more well aquainted with female anatomy than this guy ever will. Both are absolutely fine. You don’t need to have directly experienced something to work in a related role.
Why would you need to be a woman to do that job?
I fucking hate people who get outraged and want to discriminate when it matches their own views. Yeah, lets discriminate and make sure only women get certain jobs and men get other jobs. Very progressive.
People who are qualified enough should get the job. That’s the progressive stance to take.
Poor bloke just trying to do a job.
>Tennis legend Martina Navratilova described it as “absurd”, while actress Frances Barber said she was “fuming”.
Ah yes, because those folk are highly relevant to a local policy debate for schools and local authority facilities in Tayside
I do wonder, what does Morgan Freeman think about whether or not Cheshire West should build a new river crossing over the Weaver?
I think the problem is the name of the role. “Period Dignity Officer”, which suggests that he has some emotional or wellbeing support obligations for the role. This doesn’t seem to be the case and that its more of a campaign delivery/project management role.
Couldn’t give less of a toss. It’s just going to be some well-meaning but ultimately useless public sector role regardless, and as far as I can see, it’s based on experience running campaigns.
Nothing wrong with hiring a man, but why have they not hired someone anyone with a background of promotion in the women’s health sector? He’s a business owner and fitness coach?This appointment just seems poorly thought out but the scheme sounds absolutely brilliant.
12 comments
I’m not really sure I understand the outrage – did they expect the employers to discriminate based on gender and only accept female applicants?
You could argue that a man might be less able to connect with women on the issue, but hardly to the degree that it automatically disqualifies them from the job.
I’d like to see the cogs in their heads turning, if a trans women was hired. Would outrage then be justified or transphobic?
People should be more outraged that such a role exists at all.
It sounds more like a logistical / project management role in getting sanitary products to the women who need them. What’s the issue?
Jesus £36k p/a
The title is the worst aspect I think.
There are also male gynaecologists who spend their days getting far more well aquainted with female anatomy than this guy ever will. Both are absolutely fine. You don’t need to have directly experienced something to work in a related role.
Why would you need to be a woman to do that job?
I fucking hate people who get outraged and want to discriminate when it matches their own views. Yeah, lets discriminate and make sure only women get certain jobs and men get other jobs. Very progressive.
People who are qualified enough should get the job. That’s the progressive stance to take.
Poor bloke just trying to do a job.
>Tennis legend Martina Navratilova described it as “absurd”, while actress Frances Barber said she was “fuming”.
Ah yes, because those folk are highly relevant to a local policy debate for schools and local authority facilities in Tayside
I do wonder, what does Morgan Freeman think about whether or not Cheshire West should build a new river crossing over the Weaver?
I think the problem is the name of the role. “Period Dignity Officer”, which suggests that he has some emotional or wellbeing support obligations for the role. This doesn’t seem to be the case and that its more of a campaign delivery/project management role.
Couldn’t give less of a toss. It’s just going to be some well-meaning but ultimately useless public sector role regardless, and as far as I can see, it’s based on experience running campaigns.
Nothing wrong with hiring a man, but why have they not hired someone anyone with a background of promotion in the women’s health sector? He’s a business owner and fitness coach?This appointment just seems poorly thought out but the scheme sounds absolutely brilliant.
I get sweaty balls, let’s get an officer on that.