rubydazzler Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 You can't see why? He was the convenor of (presumably) an important committee and he's ogling the women in the room? He should have been paying attention to the task at hand, not making personal comments. And what's all that about 'putting out a wee word for her'? Stupid man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHsheff Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I agree, ruby. He was commenting on her in an inappropriate way. One has the impression that he could as easily have been saying, look at that whale in the second row! And, my God, her roots are showing through the bleach! It's the whole, 'judging a woman by her appearance' thing. And yes, it might (ok of course it does) go on, but one would like to believe that MPs/MEPs are somehow wise enough to not do it with the microphone on. Not every woman wants to be valued by her physical size or by the colour of her skin or the exoticness of her appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVAN LILLEY Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I really don't see why this MSP has had to quit his committee post: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10332299.stm I do not see how it could be offensive, he was positively complimentary. It's coming to something when a bloke cannot admire and comment on the beauty of a woman. OK, he was at work, probably a 30 second time out. We all do it, see an attractive member of the opposite sex, maybe comment to a mate. Don't you lasses give us the sexist thing, you know you do it too -- what about the mingers, there people to:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I agree, ruby. He was commenting on her in an inappropriate way. One has the impression that he could as easily have been saying, look at that whale in the second row! And, my God, her roots are showing through the bleach! It's the whole, 'judging a woman by her appearance' thing. And yes, it might (ok of course it does) go on, but one would like to believe that MPs/MEPs are somehow wise enough to not do it with the microphone on. Not every woman wants to be valued by her physical size or by the colour of her skin or the exoticness of her appearance. lol he wouldn't even have noticed her if she'd not been 'attractive' 'dusky' and looked like a Gaugin portrait, I do believe. It's such a stupid, sexist comment to make. You might expect it from one of the reporters, say, but the convenor of the committee? I'd expect him to display more commonsense and savoir faire . He obviously just wasn't paying attention to his work. Good riddance, we're entitled to expect better from people in public office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I agree, ruby. He was commenting on her in an inappropriate way. One has the impression that he could as easily have been saying, look at that whale in the second row! And, my God, her roots are showing through the bleach! It's the whole, 'judging a woman by her appearance' thing. And yes, it might (ok of course it does) go on, but one would like to believe that MPs/MEPs are somehow wise enough to not do it with the microphone on. Not every woman wants to be valued by her physical size or by the colour of her skin or the exoticness of her appearance. Of course they do! I long for the time when you could go to work and slap a woman on the behind and make a risque comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Of course they do! I long for the time when you could go to work and slap a woman on the behind and make a risque comment Of course we do, and if it was you doing the slapping, we'd all be queuing up for the opportunity ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted June 16, 2010 Author Share Posted June 16, 2010 Of course they do! I long for the time when you could go to work and slap a woman on the behind and make a risque comment And maybe just get a slap in the face instead of a Sexual Harassment case lodged against you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 And maybe just get a slap in the face instead of a Sexual Harassment case lodged against you Its PC gone mad I tell you! Sid James never had to worry about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 You can't see why? He was the convenor of (presumably) an important committee and he's ogling the women in the room? He should have been paying attention to the task at hand, not making personal comments. And what's all that about 'putting out a wee word for her'? Stupid man! I reckon that he'd have 'gotten away with it' if he'd just stuck to 'she's attractive' as people find that more acceptable than someone making racial comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthebean Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 He hasn't resigned from his job. Just resigned from this particular committee. He didn't simply say 'shes fit' - he was heard to say: "There's a very attractive girl in the second row, dark . . . and dusky. We'll maybe put a wee word out for her." Mr McAveety went on: "She's very attractive looking, nice, very nice, very slim," before adding: "The heat's getting to me." The MSP also said: "She looks kinda . . . she's got that Filipino look. You know . . . the kind you'd see in a Gauguin painting. There's a wee bit of culture." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.