Male student forced to step down after democratically elected as women’s officer at TUU
134 replies, posted
[QUOTE]A MALE university student has stepped down from his position as women’s officer at the Tasmania University Union (TUU), after students campaigned for a woman to be put in the role instead.
James Ritchie claims he was “democratically and constitutionally elected” to the role at the northern campus in student by-elections last month.
But a change.org petition started by the University of Tasmania’s Women’s Collective this week called for Mr Ritchie to be disqualified or resign. The petition attracted more than 1,000 signatures.
“In what have historically been male-dominated institutions, with a persistently patriarchal culture, it is important that women’s rights, needs, interests and concerns in the university context are voiced through someone elected to directly represent them,” the petition reads.
In a statement announcing his resignation on Wednesday, Mr Ritchie wrote he has been ridiculed for standing up for women’s rights and is “speechless at the hatred” directed towards him.
“It breaks my heart to see the bitterness and unwillingness to engage in mature and rational debate about women’s issues. I may not be a woman, but I am under no illusions as to the challenges women face,” he wrote.
TUU President Heidi La Paglia told news.com.au the job description did not specify the role had to go to a woman.
“It didn’t include the original clause, which was that the candidate must sign a statutory declaration to say they identify as a woman,” Ms La Paglia said. That was a mistake, she confirmed to news.com.au.
On Tuesday, the TUU student council agreed the clause should exist in the job description and the position should be held by a woman.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/james-ritchie-resigns-as-womens-officer-at-tuu/story-fnq2o7dd-1227297386040[/url]
If they cared so much, why didn't they just vote in a female instead of a male?
So much for the #HeForShe campaign
It is really sad that he gets all this harassment just for being male, as he writes in his resignation
[url]http://tuu.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/J-Ritchie-Resignation.pdf[/url]
Ya that's the toxic male-hating part of feminism that I dont agree with, you really can't be a man and agree 100% with feminism, its just impossible especially because of its direct use of gendered grammar to imply anything male is bad
Like the idea that a femenin society is somehow nicer and more polite than a masculine society, both acknowledging and embracing the stereotype that women are gentile creatures, and ignoring that aggression is not a gender specific thing, also it is just rediculous to apply gendered connotations to society
Hey we can't get what we want, fuck the voting process we'll just strong arm this shit.
[quote]"In what have historically been male-dominated institutions, with a persistently patriarchal culture, it is important that women’s rights, needs, interests and concerns in the university context are voiced through someone elected to directly represent them,” the petition reads.[/quote]
So let's take the "someone" that we elected, harass them, and force them to resign because the someone turned out to be a male. That's the most blatantly sexist thing ever.
How the fuck did they not know he was male.?
It's really not unreasonable for women to want to be represented by a woman. The fault is on the school for not putting it in the job description in the first place.
Ah I see, the double edged sword strikes again.
If this happened to be the other way around, oh boy.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47489439]It's really not unreasonable for women to want to be represented by a woman. The fault is on the school for not putting it in the job description in the first place.[/QUOTE]
However true that may be, the students themselves voted a man into that position.
I am instantly reminded of this article by the onion
[url]http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-finally-put-in-charge-of-struggling-feminist-m,2338/[/url]
[QUOTE=catbarf;47489439]It's really not unreasonable for women to want to be represented by a woman. The fault is on the school for not putting it in the job description in the first place.[/QUOTE]
Sure, they might [i]prefer[/i] that, but unfortunately it shouldn't matter. In any other normal job in society, it would be illegal to discriminate against an applicant or employee because of their gender. The guy was voted in for Christ's sake.
i don't want to be that guy, but this is the textbook definition of sexism
[QUOTE=FalconKrunch;47489445]However true that may be, the students themselves voted a man into that position.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but what the student body as a whole wants and what the women this representative is supposed to represent want don't necessarily align. The article says that the female student body wanted a female representative, so it sounds like they got quashed by the votes of the male students.
Normally if you're holding a vote for a representative, only the people who will be represented are the ones voting.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47489499]Yeah, but what the student body as a whole wants and what the women this representative is supposed to represent want don't necessarily align. The article says that the female student body wanted a female representative, so it sounds like they got quashed by the votes of the male students.
Normally if you're holding a vote for a representative, only the people who will be represented are the ones voting.[/QUOTE]
What the fuck kind of logic is this?
There were no rules akin to "no boys allowed!!" In the description
He won it fair and square, what happened after is complete utter bullshit.
[Quote]“It didn’t include the original clause, which was that the candidate must sign a statutory declaration to say they identify as a woman,” Ms La Paglia said. That was a mistake, she confirmed to news.com.au.[/quote]
So not only was he a man, but he could have been trans. I don't mean this in a negative way, but usually they tend to be the ones who can see things from both perspectives and make good decisions in these errands. And only specifically because he wasn't a woman he can't possibly know what women are or should be entitled to. Jesus H Christ.
[QUOTE=Big Johnson;47489549]There were no rules akin to "no boys allowed!!" In the description [/QUOTE]
Yeah, and I already said it was the school that fucked up with the whole process, so what are you objecting to?
If you want to choose someone to represent a specific group on campus, you should probably A. specify that the representative must be from that group, and B. probably only ask that group who they feel should represent them. Good on the guy for winning fairly, I'm only wondering why the school handled it in such a braindead way in the first place.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47489499]Yeah, but what the student body as a whole wants and what the women this representative is supposed to represent want don't necessarily align. The article says that the female student body wanted a female representative, so it sounds like they got quashed by the votes of the male students.
Normally if you're holding a vote for a representative, only the people who will be represented are the ones voting.[/QUOTE]
That reminds me when a few years back our country's Traffic and automotive minister was a person without a drivers license and our defence minister was a guy who had been relieved of conscription.
Mmm the sweet smell of democracy.
I'm betting that like my university, actual turnout for SGA elections is like 1% of the schools population
[QUOTE=catbarf;47489573]Yeah, and I already said it was the school that fucked up with the whole process, so what are you objecting to?
If you want to choose someone to represent a specific group on campus, you should probably A. specify that the representative must be from that group, and B. probably only ask that group who they feel should represent them. Good on the guy for winning fairly, I'm only wondering why the school handled it in such a braindead way in the first place.[/QUOTE]
I would really like to more about the situation though because it looks more like its one union that may or may not have that many members and then their petition was a change.org one that was open to anyone worldwide. Because for right now all I know is that he could have had support of most women actually on campus. And some of those comments on the petition seem very personal against him and some even downright transphobic ones. It seems weird to me.
[QUOTE=Sableye;47489393]Ya that's the toxic male-hating part of feminism that I dont agree with, you really can't be a man and agree 100% with feminism, its just impossible especially because of its direct use of gendered grammar to imply anything male is bad
Like the idea that a femenin society is somehow nicer and more polite than a masculine society, both acknowledging and embracing the stereotype that women are gentile creatures, and ignoring that aggression is not a gender specific thing, also it is just rediculous to apply gendered connotations to society[/QUOTE]
Can't be a man and also agree with feminism? What? I'm a man and also am a feminist.
Man-haters parading as "feminists" are the equivalent of Westboro Baptist Church when someone brings up Christians. They in no way are a part of any legitimate movement, just a vocal fringe minority. Women aren't "gentile creatures", they're just normal human beings like you and me.
Everything I ever hear regarding feminism on college campuses and universities tends to be really fucking stupid
In my books that part of the movement is stupid, have a poor understanding of the very idea of feminism, and are often sexist themselves
These days, I and I assume many others find the very word feminism synonymous with sexism.
Its basically established itself as a form of sexism directed towards men.
I don't think this is what the women who started feminism in the first place had in mind.
If they don't want men in charge of the women’s officer position fine, but harassment isn't the answer.
[QUOTE=djshox;47489762]Can't be a man and also agree with feminism? What? I'm a man and also am a feminist.
Man-haters parading as "feminists" are the equivalent of Westboro Baptist Church when someone brings up Christians. They in no way are a part of any legitimate movement, just a vocal fringe minority. Women aren't "gentile creatures", they're just normal human beings like you and me.[/QUOTE]
You're totally right except for one thing - the order of scale. The westboro people are literally a single group that can fit under one roof whereas this is a huge quantity of people, enough that they forced someone to lose their democratically elected job. If enough people co-opt a movement, that is what it becomes (though it's nowhere near that yet, it's certainly a growing problem).
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;47489850]These days, I and I assume many others find the very word feminism synonymous with sexism.
Its basically established itself as a form of sexism directed towards men.
I don't think this is what the women who started feminism in the first place had in mind.[/QUOTE]
But it really hasn't done any of that in reality. Maybe in your head, maybe to your favourite internet communities, but not in reality.
The second you start being sexist against men when flying under the banner of feminism, you've stopped being a feminist. It's really quite that simple. There are divisions amongst feminists sure, some who take a more radical stance to getting shit done, but in the grand scheme of things they are a super-minority. They have little actual impact outside of sometimes making the headlines when they charge into a place topless.
[QUOTE=Coridan;47489418]So let's take the "someone" that we elected, harass them, and force them to resign because the someone turned out to be a male. That's the most blatantly sexist thing ever.[/QUOTE]
It's retarded as well that people complain that is mostly men in US senate, when most of the voters are female.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47490085]It's retarded as well that people complain that is mostly men in US senate, when most of the voters are female.[/QUOTE]
Not how that works
[QUOTE=djshox;47489762]Can't be a man and also agree with feminism? What? I'm a man and also am a feminist.
Man-haters parading as "feminists" are the equivalent of Westboro Baptist Church when someone brings up Christians. They in no way are a part of any legitimate movement, just a vocal fringe minority. Women aren't "gentile creatures", they're just normal human beings like you and me.[/QUOTE]
I've read plenty by prominent feminists and they state unequivocally that society is run by males, thus it is a male society and since our male society is bad by replacing it with a female society it will somehow be better. I don't agree with this because it ignores much of the reality that women can be cruel evil people too, the core language like that is why men cannot ever be accepted in feminism. I support the equality that it stands for but just like all political movements the fundamentals of feminism are junk
[QUOTE=Sableye;47490160]I've read plenty by prominent feminists and they state unequivocally that society is run by males, thus it is a male society and since our male society is bad by replacing it with a female society it will somehow be better. I don't agree with this because it ignores much of the reality that women can be cruel evil people too, the core language like that is why men cannot ever be accepted in feminism. I support the equality that it stands for but just like all political movements the fundamentals of feminism are junk[/QUOTE]
Huh? Society currently IS run by men, but feminism isn't at all about "replacing" it with a women's society. Feminism is about a shared life, where everyone is equal, and that harmful gender roles are stricken down. Where have you read these writings by "prominent feminists"?
[QUOTE=djshox;47490172]Huh? Society currently IS run by men, but feminism isn't at all about "replacing" it with a women's society. Feminism is about a shared life, where everyone is equal, and that harmful gender roles are stricken down. Where have you read these writings by "prominent feminists"?[/QUOTE]
Feminist theory believes that a society that is more feminine will be somehow less aggressive, more inclusive and more peaceful, I don't see how more women in power or a hypothetical society run entirely by women will change human nature.
More women sounds more inclusive but what if you replace 10 fundamental christian male leaders with 10 fundamentalist christian females, they're both going to say gays are evil and gender dysphoria is caused by the gay agenda. Ignoring physical sex there's nothing making women any less biggoted or spiteful than men
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;47490108]Not how that works[/QUOTE]
Why not?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.