Female traffic light signals to go up at pedestrian crossing as Committee for Melbourne tackles 'unc - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Waffler;51925317]Fuckin' silly thing to do. You might as well change half the Pedestrian Crossing signs as dads take their kids to school too. [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/3BglI1p.png[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] That's meant to represent a boy and a girl, not a child and their mother. [editline]oh hamburgers[/editline] [url=https://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-vector-school-zone-or-children-crossing-sign-isolated-on-white-background-220086811.jpg]And even if you were right about that[/url]

Reminds me that here in sweden we changed some of our crossing signs, for much the same reason, from the regular [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Sweden_road_sign_B3-1.svg/500px-Sweden_road_sign_B3-1.svg.png[/IMG] to the one on the right below. The left one was a only put up in Uppsala and was deemed "too sexy" and "being too busty" and has since been replaced with the right one. [IMG]https://gfx.aftonbladet-cdn.se/image/14413981/800/normal/bebfed5a10cd4/garmanw.jpg[/IMG] As many of you have already mentioned, this is solving a problem that did not exist. Anecdote incoming: The only impact it have had on me is that I've spent longer time looking at the sign because it's different.

Whatever, not really something to get offended about. It's kinda silly to assume that non-specific stick figures are gendered though. Way to perpetuate the idea of male being the 'default' gender unless otherwise specified...

[QUOTE=Kljunas;51925465]Whatever, not really something to get offended about. It's kinda silly to assume that non-specific stick figures are gendered though. Way to perpetuate the idea of male being the 'default' gender unless otherwise specified...[/QUOTE] Exactly that. I'm not even being facetious when I say that this is a sexist action by itself and promotes traditional gender roles.

honestly, seeing the reactions in this thread just kind of proves they're on to something about unconscious bias the default guy is actually quite obviously male, with the broad shoulders and angular head. but making it obviously female instead maybe isn't the best solution imo it'd be cool to see some research into how to make icons look more gender-neutral - the psychological aspect of how we percieve simple shapes would be interesting

so a private advocacy groups spends a few grand of their own money to replace some traffic lights, an act almost no one who uses the crosswalk is going to notice, and everyone explodes in outrage. I'd say they got their money's worth lol.

[QUOTE=Mr_Plumrich;51925462]Reminds me that here in sweden we changed some of our crossing signs, for much the same reason, from the regular [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Sweden_road_sign_B3-1.svg/500px-Sweden_road_sign_B3-1.svg.png[/IMG] [/IMG] As many of you have already mentioned, this is solving a problem that did not exist. [/QUOTE] I wish those were our road signs. They make so much more sense than ours. That said, ours is this: [IMG]http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_reg/images/2014.205.un87.jpg[/IMG] Perhaps we should replace our traffic lights with the legs too.

Waste of money, adds nothing to the world, and pretty much irrelevant. Can't say I am too pleased about this. Least it isn't paid by Tax payers. How about this, you have 50% of the Lights Female, 50% of the Lights Male? You only have to change half the Lights, you get your "Equality" and it adds some variation.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I think most people would agree that they never saw the crossing person as a man. But I guess people see what they want to see. The only thing that really bothers me, other than the fact that it's kind of pointless, is that the lights are there for safety, not to make political statements. I'd hate to see someone with poorer vision make a fatal decision because they struggled to make out the image in the light.

[QUOTE=Xonax;51925607]Waste of money, adds nothing to the world, and pretty much irrelevant. Can't say I am too pleased about this.[/QUOTE] Imagine being this angry over a traffic light. I wish my life had so few complications that this was something worth getting upset about You should calm down darling

[QUOTE=Doozle;51925692]Imagine being this angry over a traffic light. I wish my life had so few complications that this was something worth getting upset about You should calm down darling[/QUOTE] also imagine being angry over a traffic light to feel the need to change it

[QUOTE=Darth Ninja;51925688]I appreciate the sentiment, but I think most people would agree that they never saw the crossing person as a man. But I guess people see what they want to see. The only thing that really bothers me, other than the fact that it's kind of pointless, is that the lights are there for safety, not to make political statements. I'd hate to see someone with poorer vision make a fatal decision because they struggled to make out the image in the light.[/QUOTE] Non-issue, they did not change the colors, or the position. Will you honestly stand behind the notion that there is people out there that interpret traffic signals by the shape alone? The only thing that will happen is the delay in a few moments of people noticing that this one is not like the others. Now, I do actually share some of the sentiment. Traffic signals should be uniformed as to not cause unnecessary confusion, as I believe these ridiculous changes do. Remember that human perception is working in split seconds and a delay in interpretation, even as short as what this may cause, could lead to consequences. BTW, this is my opinion alone and not some kind of "doomsday" exaggeration.

[QUOTE=Doozle;51925692]Imagine being this angry over a traffic light. I wish my life had so few complications that this was something worth getting upset about[/QUOTE] Yeah it's bizarre that there was an entire lobby group dedicated to this "issue".

[QUOTE=Xonax;51925607] How about this, you have 50% of the Lights Female, 50% of the Lights Male? You only have to change half the Lights, you get your "Equality" and it adds some variation.[/QUOTE] I mean... that's what is said in the article.

[QUOTE=Scratch.;51925702]also imagine being angry over a traffic light to feel the need to change it[/QUOTE] Luckily this wasn't done because of outrage, it was done because "hey, why don't we try this."

[QUOTE=Doozle;51925692]Imagine being this angry over a traffic light. I wish my life had so few complications that this was something worth getting upset about You should calm down darling[/QUOTE] You're joking right? There is nothing in my post that says I am upset let alone Angry. I am just disappointed cause it's a ton of money. If I was angry it would go something like this. "What the, this is stupid, what a waste of time and money for something so dumb like this. Gender has no place in a stick figure, let alone a damn pedestrian crossing light. This is stupid." If anything, I am more upset/angry over your baseless accusation than this entire Pedestrian Light situation. [QUOTE=DogGunn;51925725]I mean... that's what is said in the article.[/QUOTE] Misread, my bad.

They should follow East Germany's example that features Freddy Krueger being nailed to the cross. [t]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IuVhLbIvmnU/T2QWM3BCZUI/AAAAAAAAAYY/wb5aw6Wo-38/s1600/east+germany.png[/t]

[QUOTE=killerteacup;51925078]Well sure but at the end of the day it's a company commissioning a set of lights and that's not really objectionable in any way This is a relatively small deal and the only reason you guys give a shit is because it made the news really. Like it's ten traffic lights, it's a nice free gesture, it probably took like two weeks on and off to organise and was done through a sponsorship, it's a kooky idea but it's not offensive in any way Personally I'd love to see a bit more uniqueness in walking signals, women and people with hats and stuff. So long as it's recognisable it doesn't really introduce any significant risk[/QUOTE] Yeah you'd be right if they did it for fun, but it's been explicitly stated it's been done for nonsense faux-progressive reasons. We're criticising reasons not actions. [editline]7th March 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Doozle;51925291]They're just crossing lights. You man get upset over everything [/QUOTE] Again, we're criticising reasons not actions

"Back when I was younger, we had to live with a single gender traffic light" Oh grandpa the horror

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51924870][img]http://i.imgur.com/skO4bG9.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Alright, [I]in all fairness[/I] I can kinda see from the torso how in this particular instance, the traffic-light looks a bit more masculine. It's still a non-issue, anyway.

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;51926455]Alright, [I]in all fairness[/I] I can kinda see from the torso how in this particular instance, the traffic-light looks a bit more masculine. It's still a non-issue, anyway.[/QUOTE] True equality would have wanted them exchanged with plain stick figures. But then again, the people wanting it would actually have to want TRUE equality.

This is hands down the most asinine use of money I have ever seen in my life. I get that they are trying to be all social justicy about this but in reality aren't they just reinforcing gender stereotypes by assuming that females only wear dresses? Would this not be even more sexist than just leaving it as a stick figure? Using SJW logic it seems like it would be.

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;51926455]Alright, [I]in all fairness[/I] I can kinda see from the torso how in this particular instance, the traffic-light looks a bit more masculine.[/QUOTE] i'm not seeing it, what's masculine about it?

[QUOTE=PsiSoldier;51926644]i'm not seeing it, what's masculine about it?[/QUOTE] My post was like two sentences long, dude. [QUOTE=Coyoteze;51926455]I can kinda see [B][I][U]from the torso[/U][/I][/B][/QUOTE]

My opinion is: If they try to solve problems that don't exist, then you have reached your goal already. Now they are just making stuff up to be employed. It's like with the difference between second and third wave feminism. Equality was reached in the western civlization, so they turn into strifing supremacy.

One small step for man, one, giant leap for closing the traffic light gender gap.

[QUOTE=CarnolfMeatla;51926674]My opinion is: If they try to solve problems that don't exist, then you have reached your goal already. Now they are just making stuff up to be employed. It's like with the difference between second and third wave feminism. Equality was reached in the western civlization, so they turn into strifing supremacy.[/QUOTE] do you look at a publicity stunt for cancer research and think "well if they're doing this then I guess cancer is over". just because an advocacy group does a bit of harmless promoting doesn't mean that "we now have equality so feminism please go away." this is such a weird way to dismiss equality campaigning, like I guess if they do literally anything other than donate money to women's shelters then feminism is over. except people would probably complain too because the shelter isn't gender neutral.

This is kinda dumb imo. Find actual problems to solve.

It's quite sad that it has gotten this overreaction It's a small city initiative to make the lights have a variety of each gender in order to reduce unconscious bias. It's small potatoes.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51927069]It's quite sad that it has gotten this overreaction It's a small city initiative to make the lights have a variety of each gender in order to reduce unconscious bias. It's small potatoes.[/QUOTE] What unconscious bias? That only men walk across intersections? I'm not angry because I personally give a shit I'm angry because conservatives are going to drudge this up, point at it, laugh, show it to moderates who'll also shake their heads and agree with them that it's stupid, and that I'll then look dumb by proxy for being politically associated with these movements. This is pointless. Find actual problems to solve.