Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
More fibs from Rachel? 12:43 - Feb 18 with 2942 viewsAnotherJohn

After the CV questions. there is now a bit of a flap about Rachel Reeves' "Who's Who" entry. Following a Times investigation it seems that this repeats the incorrect information about the length of time she worked at the Bank of England, and also contains a misleading claim to a prestigious journal publication. This is perhaps not the greatest of sins, but would have been considered very naughty if she had been applying for an academic post.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/rachel-reevess-whos-who-entry-lists

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/rachel-reeves-wrongly-claimed-to-have-work

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2015825/rachel-reeves-whos-who-error
[Post edited 18 Feb 12:51]
0
More fibs from Rachel? on 00:11 - Feb 22 with 291 viewsRobbie

More fibs from Rachel? on 14:13 - Feb 21 by Boundy

Then all I can say is suck it up , and if that offends anyone then they can also suck it up


It was a joke mun .
0
More fibs from Rachel? on 06:24 - Feb 22 with 192 viewsJACKMANANDBOY

More fibs from Rachel? on 19:03 - Feb 21 by Gwyn737

As I posted earlier in the thread, it’s basically calling her a trumped up secretary, taking a traditionally women’s job and belittling it.

So far a few have tried to give examples of nicknames for men as comparable, but I’ve yet to see one that is.


That's an interesting interpretation, mine was that she was behaving like an accountant rather than.economist. I've worked with female CEOs and Directors most of which have been very capable. My sister in law is a fire fighter, my daughter in law is an aircraft engineer and my wife worked as an actuary, I don't automatically see women as a secretary.
I think if you state on your CV that you worked as an economist when you were working in complaints you are going to get some stick as a politician, no matter who you are.

Besian Idrizaj Forever a Jack
Poll: When will Duff Revert to 4 at the Back

0
More fibs from Rachel? on 06:41 - Feb 22 with 187 viewsAnotherJohn

More fibs from Rachel? on 20:05 - Feb 21 by Gwyn737

Which ones of those are based on sex?

As I said, I’ve no issue with Reeves the incompetent/useless etc., it’s the latent sexism I don’t like.

Edit: I’ve thought of one. The Grocer’s Daughter for Thatcher. Not sexist but snobbery. The same in that it puts an unnecessary barrier up.

[Post edited 21 Feb 20:08]


"Which one is based on sex?" (of the male nicknames)

At a stretch it could be argued that some appear to be based on disvalued male work stereotypes (Spreadsheet Phil) or the implication that a male does something stereotypically associated with females (Mogadon Man). The obvious one with a gender dimension is Hunt's nickname, an insulting reference to a defining female characteristic.
0
More fibs from Rachel? on 07:17 - Feb 22 with 172 viewsGwyn737

More fibs from Rachel? on 06:41 - Feb 22 by AnotherJohn

"Which one is based on sex?" (of the male nicknames)

At a stretch it could be argued that some appear to be based on disvalued male work stereotypes (Spreadsheet Phil) or the implication that a male does something stereotypically associated with females (Mogadon Man). The obvious one with a gender dimension is Hunt's nickname, an insulting reference to a defining female characteristic.


You could definitely make that argument but I wouldn’t say they either of those made common parlance as the one for Reeves.

I’ve leave it there as I’ve said my bit.
0
More fibs from Rachel? on 10:39 - Feb 22 with 128 viewsBoundy

More fibs from Rachel? on 00:11 - Feb 22 by Robbie

It was a joke mun .


I know

"In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master."

0
More fibs from Rachel? on 14:27 - Feb 22 with 86 viewsSullutaCreturned

More fibs from Rachel? on 23:06 - Feb 21 by raynor94

I think you need to put the spade down Gwyn😉


I think it's fuss about nothing. Nobody claims sexism when "Tony Bliar" was used but that is his name and a blatant accusation of dishonesty.

Sexist, Mysogynistic, I don't think so, a bit of a dig definitely but why is it nearly always ok to use derogatory terms about men but not women?

What happened to equality? Well we know that but even so.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2025