PDA

View Full Version : Harperson says BBC 'doesn't value' older women


Mad Tony
03-01-10, 11:57
Equality minister Harriet Harman has attacked the BBC for "not valuing" older female newsreaders.

Ms Harman told the BBC's World This Weekend female newsreaders had to be 10 years younger than male equivalents. She said: "It's essentially an old-fashioned attitude that thinks you can't value the experience and wisdom of an older woman." The BBC has pledged to appoint more older female newsreaders following criticism for "ageism".

Ms Harman said: "I think that the broadcast media finds it possible to value the older man but I don't think they find it possible to value the older woman. "A former senior BBC executive said to me: 'the thing is, the way we saw it was that as male presenters got older they become an authority and as female presenters got older they became a problem'. "To be a BBC news presenter as a woman you have to be 10 years younger than the men. "They should be very careful about it and I think they should be anxious and worried about it... and I think they're wasting a lot of talent and annoying a lot of viewers."

Ms Harman's intervention follows widespread criticism of the BBC for its perceived discrimination against older female presenters.

More older women

In 2007, BBC Director General Mark Thompson denied the corporation's decision to remove then-58-year-old Moira Stewart from her regular news slot on Sunday AM was motivated by her age. He told MPs on the culture select committee that Ms Stewart's "traditional" news reader's role, as opposed to a correspondent or presenter, had "virtually died out".

Last year the BBC again denied accusations of ageism after replacing Strictly Come Dancing Judge Arlene Phillips, 66, with former winner Alesha Dixon, 30. Following the row the corporation announced it would be recruiting more older women presenters.

Veteran newsreader Julia Somerville is due to return to the BBC as a TV news presenter after an absence of of nearly 23 years. She will join Westminster correspondent Carole Walker, former ITN newsreader Fiona Armstrong and BBC World presenter Zeinab Badawi on the TV news service.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8438216.stm

Anyone else find it scary that this feminazi actually has a good shot of being PM one day? I mean, this woman is so obsessed with making everyone equal (along with most of the Labour party) that she actually discriminates against the "majorities" and men. Although, I think she just hates men anyway. And yet, after all this, she refuses to acknowledge our only female prime minister (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6194148/Margaret-Thatcher-airbrushed-from-Harriet-Harmans-history-of-women-in-politics.html), who might I add didn't need some pathetic all-women shortlist to get elected as an MP.

For all I moan about Gordon Brown, he's ten times better than she is.

T-Sex
03-01-10, 12:09
Thats... cool?

Laralissa
03-01-10, 12:47
Thats... cool?

Nice example of someone who doesnt read the article and wants a higher post count.


As for the topic at hand, I have to say I kind of agree. You don't see too many 'older' women thesedays, not that its something I go looking for on television, but I guess the bbc are trying to appeal to a younger generation and think that to do so they have to have younger newsreaders and such - which is wrong, to me at least. Id rather have someone with experience who knows what theyre talking about than eye candy for the men to look at (and the fact that my boyfriend eyes up that blonde presenter on gmtv has absolutely nothing to do with this :p)

Edit: Emma Crosby! That's her name - and fair enough she's 32, but still :pi:

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 13:03
Yeah but Harperson always complains about how women are supposedly under-represented. If she had her way it'd be law for parliament to be at least 50% female (but anything over that is fine too because she's a sexist *****).

jackles
03-01-10, 13:37
Well I don't actually like her that much, I think she is humourless and don't get me started on the whole expenses debacle...




................however the beeb does favour young women over old. If I was a newsreader I would be out on my ear now!

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 14:06
Well I don't actually like her that much, I think she is humourless and don't get me started on the whole expenses debacle...Because of that!? :p What about her discriminatory views and hypocrisy? Not only does she hate white British men, she also hates the upper and middle classes, despite the fact that she comes from a very privileged background and sent her children to private schools. Yeah, a lot of the Conservative front bench may come from wealthy backgrounds but at least they aren't hypocritical and don't engage in petty class warfare. Unlike Labour, they look out for the middle class. We need the government to cut us a break for once, because for the last 13 years they've been punishing us.

jackles
03-01-10, 14:10
Gawd and there was me thinking you would just be impressed by the fact that I actually dislike her! rofl!


I just think she does women a disservice and the silly woman can't even see it.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 14:14
Gawd and there was me thinking you would just be impressed by the fact that I actually dislike her! rofl!


I just think she does women a disservice and the silly woman can't even see it.Lol, well I thought it was a given that most people disliked her. :p She goes way OTT with all this promoting equality crap.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174669/Now-Top-Gear-fall-foul-Harman-sexism-law.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6194148/Margaret-Thatcher-airbrushed-from-Harriet-Harmans-history-of-women-in-politics.html)

Seriously, with people like her around I worry about the future of our democracy. How long before white men and Christians are barred from standing for parliament?

And I agree. Get rid of the all-women shortlists. Thatcher didn't need that to get into office - she got in because she was damn good.

Trigger_happy
03-01-10, 14:41
What she says is true, but the telly gets rid of old people in general: there are comparatively few old actors and actresses.

And Harperson is a complete twit, to put it nicely. She is only still in politics because discriminating against men is fine. Anything against women is sickening, but against men is fine.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 15:38
If she loses her seat (which is highly unlikely) she'll say it's because she's a woman.

Oh yeah, and scrap that equalities commission.

Saphyre
03-01-10, 15:40
What she says is true, but the telly gets rid of old people in general: there are comparatively few old actors and actresses.

And Harperson is a complete twit, to put it nicely. She is only still in politics because discriminating against men is fine. Anything against women is sickening, but against men is fine.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this awful and stupid trend in our society. I personally hate people who think they can do/say whatever they want to a man when they would hate for the same to be done to women. Including this bloody superiority *cough* -I mean equality minister.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 15:46
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this awful and stupid trend in our society.Nope, you're definitely not the only one.

Funny how in 100 years we've gone from discriminating against women to discriminating against men. Same with race and religion really.

jackles
03-01-10, 15:48
Now bearing in mind I am a feminist.......there was supposed to be EQUALITY. :o I don't see this as being equal, equality should be based on merit and ability regardless of race/gender/colour/sexuality/age.








Adverts are the worse. If some of the ads which show negative male images were replaced by those of women there would be an outcry.


If I say the BBC 'doesn't value 'older' women' will that be more acceptable. ;)

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 15:49
Now bearing in mind I am a feminist.......there was supposed to be EQUALITY. :o I don't see this as being equal, equality should be based on merit and ability regardless of race/gender/colour/sexuality/age.








Adverts are the worse. If some of the ads which show negative male images were replaced by those of women there would be an outcry.


If I say the BBC 'doesn't value 'older' women' will that be more acceptable. ;)You're a feminist? :(

Saphyre
03-01-10, 15:52
Adverts are the worse. If some of the ads which show negative male images were replaced by those of women there would be an outcry.


If I say the BBC 'doesn't value 'older' women' will that be more acceptable. ;)

Music can be bad too imo. I mean there are a few songs out there (usually sang by women) which make out that men (in general) are just all out *******s. Also songs which promote female superiority rather than equality (which is what original feminists wanted to promote, and rightly so.)

The funny thing is, this article is more about agism than sexism, yet we find ourselves talking about sexism. But the more people are made aware of sexism that happens towards men the better IMO. Because some people honestly think it doesn't exist.

jackles
03-01-10, 15:59
You're a feminist? :(



Lmao!!

A little tale.....back in the seventies I became aware that most images of women were 'dolly birds', my mum gave up work when she married and women were portrayed as either dizzy or battleaxes. Later I realised that there was no expectation that I could do any proper job when I left school...no one actually cared what I did. I found an advert for computers claiming to 'turn boys into scientists' and I reacted against this. I became deeply interested in womans history...the hidden history. When I did sociology I realised that every single ad..even for nappies closed with a MALE voice...

So yes I believe in equality though now I would suggest I am a humanist. Things have gone to far to the other extreme. We need good male role models. We need books where boys are smart and intelligent and dare I say 'noble'.

*oops jumps off soap box*



*jumps back on*

But you see I always end up apologising for my age...it is like I as a woman become devalued by it whereas a man is more valued for wisdom

Saphyre
03-01-10, 16:02
Lmao!!

A little tale.....back in the seventies I became aware that most images of women were 'dolly birds', my mum gave up work when she married and women were portrayed as either dizzy or battleaxes. Later I realised that there was no expectation that I could do any proper job when I left school...no one actually cared what I did. I found an advert for computers claiming to 'turn boys into scientists' and I reacted against this. I became deeply interested in womans history...the hidden history. When I did sociology I realised that every single ad..even for nappies closed with a MALE voice...

So yes I believe in equality though now I would suggest I am a humanist. Things have gone to far to the other extreme. We need good male role models. We need books where boys are smart and intelligent and dare I say 'noble'.

*oops jumps off soap box*



*jumps back on*

But you see I always end up apologising for my age...it is like I as a woman become devalued by it whereas a man is more valued for wisdom

I'm so glad a woman can see the troubles boys are going through jackles!. I often find myself in that trap where I believe women don't give two ****s about men. :( (though thats more a personal issue on my part)

And for the record I agree with what you said about the sexism women endured in the seventies (though I wasn't around then, I can pretty much imagine.)

jackles
03-01-10, 16:14
I think the real turning point for me was having my son. I now saw that every baby book said 'she', there were literally no mention of boys at all. well meaning I am sure but really.......why not put 'they' or some other non gender specific word. Televison programmes contained brainy girls who huffed at boys inadequacies while boys just appeared dumb or aggressive.

Role models???? well when I was growing up we had explorers and stuff....now....50cent? Thats who the ten year old boys like at my school. :(


I did say I was putting my soap box away didn't I?


;)


Equality should be for all.

Saphyre
03-01-10, 16:28
I agree, and I also think the media make out its more desirable to be a girl these days. (And scarily they make out its more desirable to have a daughter, hence only referring to babies as "she", and how many women do you see on the telly that claim they want a daughter and get upset when they have a son?) The media kinda make out they're the best at everything and that boys are nothing but an annoying burden, like flies that should be flicked away. The media also focus solely on girls/womens issues and forget about men entirely.

Girls and women are also free to insult men in general and make really sexist comments all the time. Its just 'accepted' and its really sad to me honest. And don't get me started on the violence issues and how its perfectly fine for women to punch and hit men when the other way round is just abominable to even think about!

I honestly think this coming generation of boys are gonna be at a major disadvantage.

But the problem is Jackles, no offence, but I think some of todays feminists would turn their nose up at you. The reason I think this is because when a woman supports men, then a lot of other women look down on her and think the said woman is "anti womens rights."

I know you're really passionate about womens rights but its just that you're open minded and can see the other side of the coin. Unfortunately others won't be able to see that.

And I know that a lot of the discriminatory things I have posted out in this post once and some still do happened a lot to girls/women. I'm not unaware of womens suffrage at all before anyone starts. Its just most are aware of the womans side of sexism, but not the mens.

You could say its males getting a taste of their own medicine. But why should the upcoming generation of boys have to suffer for what happened in the past?

We're both on our soap boxes now Jackles!! :D

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 16:33
The funny thing is, this article is more about agism than sexism, yet we find ourselves talking about sexism. But the more people are made aware of sexism that happens towards men the better IMO. Because some people honestly think it doesn't exist.Whenever Harriet Harperson comes up in a conversation, sexism is bound to be discussed. After all, it is her, not the Tory male MPs, who is the most sexist in parliament.

Lemmie
03-01-10, 16:41
Seriously, with people like her around I worry about the future of our democracy. How long before white men and Christians are barred from standing for parliament?

Never sounds like a good long time to me.

Get rid of the all-women shortlists.

I agree here.

jackles
03-01-10, 16:41
lmao! its fine...actually some old school feminists would agree with me...because there have been several articles saying we have gone to far....


http://www.femail.com.au/has-the-feminist-movement-gone-too-far.htm

If you google 'feminism going too far' you will find other discussions and of course a lot of feminists would disagree with me. Women are still devalued. But I don't feel that women now acting like stereotypical man of the seventies and being retrospectively negative towards them is the way to improve things.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 16:46
Never sounds like a good long time to me.With the way things are going it's definitely a possibility. It's the kind of thing a Labour government would do to "try and get the population better represented in parliament."

Lemmie
03-01-10, 17:14
With the way things are going it's definitely a possibility. It's the kind of thing a Labour government would do to "try and get the population better represented in parliament."

It's extremely improbable. You could never ban white people of either gender or Christians from politics and still call yourself democratic.

Nenya awakens
03-01-10, 17:15
Ok :)

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 17:16
http://i48.************/2zpmkav.jpg


16 going on 40, lighten up.
That's quite enough, I think.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 17:50
Why do people have a go at me for what I'm interested in? Loads of people on here are obsessed with Lady Gaga and Britney Spears (to name two examples) yet I don't go and troll their respective threads.

Seriously, STFU and grow up. I find you incredibly boring too, Nenya awakenes.

It's you're, not your, by the way. :)

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 17:56
Why do people have a go at me for what I'm interested in? Loads of people on here are obsessed with Lady Gaga and Britney Spears (to name two examples) yet I don't go and troll their respective threads.

Seriously, STFU and grow up. I find you incredibly boring too, Nenya awakenes.
Same goes for you. Being attacked doesn't give you the right to retaliate in kind.

As for the actual topic, I think favoring any kind of social group is wrong. I think this automatic bashing of Labour for any kind of actual and alleged problem is unconstructive, though. Why not come up with solutions of your own instead of trying to destroy everything you don't agree with?

TRhalloween
03-01-10, 18:04
Seriously, with people like her around I worry about the future of our democracy. How long before white men and Christians are barred from standing for parliament?

FFS. Do you realise what you're saying? You should wait a few years and then gain a political opinion.

I can't stand you and your ideals.

Saphyre
03-01-10, 18:12
Okay I don't like how this thread is becoming a bashing thread towards a certain user.

Funny how this article is going on about being agist yet I think some people are agist towards Mad Tony because he's 16-17 yet he has an opinion on politics.

Don't get me wrong, I don't always agree with him, but I just hold back my arguments. Flaw? Maybe, maybe not. *shrug*

Laras Backpack
03-01-10, 18:21
Adverts are the worse. If some of the ads which show negative male images were replaced by those of women there would be an outcry.



You've reminded me of this insipid advert on UK TV recently. I don't know if it's still on. It was for a cleaning product of some kind. The advert had a woman and a man side by side in a kitchen and the tag line was 'So easy, even a man could do it!'

Ugh! Just. Arg! :hea:

The woman was a sexist pig. As a woman myself I was disgusted and felt that we should all know better by now. Did they think this kind of thing is empowering to women? Did they think it didn't just amount to arrogance and bullying?

And the guy in the advert- I know actors need work but wow. It was so insulting to his gender. In his place I would have refused the job.

The advert was really cheap looking too.

Nenya awakens
03-01-10, 18:23
Why do people have a go at me for what I'm interested in? Loads of people on here are obsessed with Lady Gaga and Britney Spears (to name two examples) yet I don't go and troll their respective threads.

Seriously, STFU and grow up. I find you incredibly boring too, Nenya awakenes.

It's you're, not your, by the way. :)

:)

TRhalloween
03-01-10, 18:30
And by the way, there's one Gaga thread and one Britney thread. There's a billion right wing political threads.

Laralissa
03-01-10, 18:43
And by the way, there's one Gaga thread and one Britney thread. There's a billion right wing political threads.

Yes but the difference is, Mad Tony doesnt bust into the lady gaga and Britney threads with the pure intention of insulting those who post there.

Like it or not, these 'right wing political threads' are to do with things which affect us all - to be honest, Im not a major politics buff, but at least Im smart enough to realise that these issues apply to all of us, whether we think they're 'boring' or not. If you think these threads are pointless, dont post in them - and dont get on at Mad Tony for quite rightfully wanting to voice his opinion on something in regards to our country.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 19:55
Same goes for you. Being attacked doesn't give you the right to retaliate in kind.

As for the actual topic, I think favoring any kind of social group is wrong. I think this automatic bashing of Labour for any kind of actual and alleged problem is unconstructive, though. Why not come up with solutions of your own instead of trying to destroy everything you don't agree with?Sorry Mona

What do you mean exactly? I'm not bashing the entire Labour party for this, I'm bashing Harriet Harman in particular for always going on about the alleged inequalities in this country. She sees inequalities that don't exist. However, I do admit that I have thrown in a couple of attacks towards Labour and their overly politically correct policies over the course of this thread, but Harriet Harman has been my main target.

FFS. Do you realise what you're saying? You should wait a few years and then gain a political opinion.

I can't stand you and your ideals.What, that political correctness and the obsession with inequality is becoming so bad that one day a Labour government might end up banning any more white Christian men from standing for parliament (because a lot of incumbent MPs belong to that group) in an attempt to get better representation of the population in the house of commons?

Why, did you interpret it as something else?

Don't be so ageist. Just because I'm only young doesn't mean I'm not allowed to be interested in politics. That's the problem these days - not enough young people are getting interested in politics. This generation will be running the country in 40 years time. Taking an interest in politics should be encouraged, not discouraged. I can foresee a dangerous future for this country if we continue down this path of showing nothing but apathy towards politics and other such things that affect our everyday lives.

Oddly enough it's not old people who discourage young people from being interested in politics, it's young people themselves. The few of us in this age group who are interested in it get told by the rest that we should be interested in something else.

What is it exactly you can't stand about me?

:)I'd rather misread and spell somebody's username wrong than say your instead of you're :)

And by the way, there's one Gaga thread and one Britney thread. There's a billion right wing political threads.Laralissa got it spot on.

Oh, and this is not a left or right issue. Just because I'm right wing and I made this thread doesn't automatically make it right-wing.

Thank you Laralissa and Saphyre for not standing up to ageism.

jackles
03-01-10, 20:09
Personally I can't see why people need to attack MT, if you don't agree with the politics then post counter arguments. As he well knows I am a left winger, traditional Labour voter and therefore politically poles apart but I would rather challenge thinking in a celebral manner than any other.

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 20:10
What do you mean exactly? I'm not bashing the entire Labour party for this, I'm bashing Harriet Harman in particular for always going on about the alleged inequalities in this country. She sees inequalities that don't exist. However, I do admit that I have thrown in a couple of attacks towards Labour and their overly politically correct policies over the course of this thread, but Harriet Harman has been my main target.
It's a fact that lots of inequalities still exist - women are underrepresented in parliaments and they still receive lower salaries than men for similar work. They are expected to sacrifice family if they intend to hit the up escalator professionally, where it's accepted for workaholic family men to hardly ever see their children. In many states and countries, it's unlikely for a homosexual person to be elected. An openly atheist (or otherwise of a non-Christian faith) American president is downright unthinkable. Limiting people's choice who they want to elect can't be a solution. What is yours? If you want to bash somebody for their opinion, you've got to provide an alternative. A bad solution is usually still better than none at all.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 20:10
Personally I can't see why people need to attack MT, if you don't agree with the politics then post counter arguments. As he well knows I am a left winger, traditional Labour voter and therefore politically poles apart but I would rather challenge thinking in a celebral manner than any other.The silly thing is Jackles, I'm getting attacked just because I'm interested in politics, not really for my views. That said, I do get attacked for my views but I'd much rather that. Attacking someone for their interests is just completely ludicrous. :p

It's a fact that lots of inequalities still exist - women are underrepresented in parliaments and they still receive lower salaries than men for similar work. In many states and countries, it's unlikely for a homosexual person to be elected. An openly atheist (or otherwise of a non-Christian faith) American president is downright unthinkable. Limiting people's choice who they want to elect can't be a solution. What is yours? If you want to bash somebody for their opinion, you've got to provide an alternative. A bad solution is usually still better than none at all.The only thing there that I think should be addressed with laws is salaries. Everything else is all what the people have chosen. Yeah, women are underrepresented in parliament, but this doesn't mean we should discriminate against men just to try and balance it out. The same applies to minorities. We shouldn't exclude straight men for instance in certain parliamentary constituences from running for office to try and get more homosexual people into parliament. To be honest I don't think the sexuality, religion, race or gender of MPs matters. I want the best people in parliament, not the best representation of the population.

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 20:17
Is what the people have chosen always a good thing? As I said, discrimination is out of the question. Education, however, is not. Uninformed people make bad decisions, so I think that is where we have to start.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 20:27
Is what the people have chosen always a good thing? As I said, discrimination is out of the question. Education, however, is not. Uninformed people make bad decisions, so I think that is where we have to start.No, but that doesn't mean we should interfere in the democratic process. After all, it's not people are electing tyrants into parliament.

What do you mean by educate exactly?

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 20:37
'Provide with information'. Make sure that everybody has access to good, politically, economically and religiously independent schools and universities, regardless of wealth or status. Make sure that people have access to all relevant information before elections and votes, not only what the loudest and richest can afford to propagate. In short, give people a good, solid ground for them to build their society on. That's not interfering with the democratic process, that's enabling it. You don't tell people how to vote, you give them the chance to make an informed choice of their own.

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 20:40
'Provide with information'. Make sure that everybody has access to good, politically, economically and religiously independent schools and universities, regardless of wealth or status. Make sure that people have access to all relevant information before elections and votes, not only what the loudest and richest can afford to propagate. In short, give people a good, solid ground for them to build their society on. That's not interfering with the democratic process, that's enabling it. You don't tell people how to vote, you give them the chance to make an informed choice of their own.Woah, are you supporting the idea of "free" university and school places in that first sentence?

People do have access to all of the relevant information already.

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 20:42
Woah, are you supporting the idea of "free" university and school places in that first sentence?
I certainly wouldn't mind, or at least an efficient scholarship system that doesn't exclude poor people from a higher education.
People do have access to all of the relevant information already.
Not really, if you look at American elections. It's not about who has the better arguments, it's about who can afford the bigger megaphone.

jackles
03-01-10, 20:46
British Elections are different I think Mona with the british public being a contrary bunch. If anything people have to downplay how much money they are putting into anything.




I think all education should be accessible...and equal. Opportunties for all. ;)

Mad Tony
03-01-10, 20:52
I certainly wouldn't mind, or at least an efficient scholarship system that doesn't exclude poor people from a higher education.That's all well and good except for the cost and the expansion of government.

I always thought our scholarship system here was pretty good.

Not really, if you look at American elections. It's not about who has the better arguments, it's about who can afford the bigger megaphone.Perhaps this may be partly the case, but in the end it is the people who decide.

Mona Sax
03-01-10, 21:02
That's all well and good except for the cost and the expansion of government.
No government - independent schools and universities. Government funded, obviously (or rather people funded, via taxes), but without government influence. About the cost... education is any society's most valuable achievement. It's worth it. Besides, with military costs spiraling out of control, redirecting the flow of money to more constructive areas wouldn't be such a bad idea.
Perhaps this may be partly the case, but in the end it is the people who decide.
You can't really decide when all you've heard are screamed smears and half-truths.