Comments | kixie: Some guy is insulting women again

kixie

Some guy is insulting women again

Dec 18, 2007 10:04

Ok, GRR.

Last week the Times published an 'article' by this tool Tad Safran (Who?) on how British women don't groom themselves enough compared to American women and lots of women became furious and yadda yadda because, y'know, he sounds like a chauvanist pig. He is a chauvanist pig, if his writing is anything to go by, although I think there's ( Read more... )

argh, news, feminine_rage, linkies

Comments 48

(The comment has been removed)

kixie December 18 2007, 10:53:35 UTC

Ah yes, I saw the Facebook account, and no, he's no prize. And he also looks like the type of guy who would seriously benefit from a chest wax and you just know he has hairy feet.

(The comment has been removed)

kixie December 18 2007, 11:28:24 UTC

He's not hideous, he just looks quite hairy, not particularly well kept and plain looking. He certainly doesn't put the effort into his appearance that some people we know do.

Thread 10

(The comment has been removed)

kixie December 18 2007, 10:53:56 UTC

WHY DIDN'T I KNOW THIS!? ARGH, so much money could have been saved!!
*wail*

fizzyboot December 18 2007, 10:56:11 UTC

It's not even an article, it's not anything other than sensationalist misogyny with spite and vitriol added in for flavour and a huge cry of "PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEE!".

Well it'as working, isn't it? I mean, you are paying attention to him.

Actually I suspect a large amount of what appears in the press (and in books, to a lesser extent) is deliberately sensationalised in order to get people to pay attention to the writer.

kixie December 18 2007, 11:01:41 UTC

Yeah, but it's on my journal adn not, say, on the Have Your Say area of the Times and on his Facebook and whatnot, where - apparently - hysterical, infuriated women have been spamming him for nigh on a week now (and probably for longer). TBH I'm not that pissed at him, as I said before, I'm just baffled at the Times for publishing that stuff. It sounds like more of a thing for FHM or something. As much as I might dislike Tad whoever, I really, really dislike the Times ( ... )

fizzyboot December 18 2007, 11:28:37 UTC

It's a shame - ideally (yes, I know) journalism could be a really cool profession filled with the kind of people who broke the Watergate story and blah blah and instead it's like "women don't shave their legs enough and should get collagen lips." Meh.

Of course 90% of journalism is crap -- 90% of everything is crap! Sturgeon's law strikes again!

Think of it this way: without the 90% that's crap, you couldn't have the 10% that's good. So, really, crap journalism is performing a valuable service.

kixie December 18 2007, 11:32:58 UTC

Maybe we could fudge the numbers a bit...perhaps 60% crap and 40% good? I'd settle for 75/25...

sera_squeak December 18 2007, 11:16:26 UTC

The fact that the Times published the articles in the first place was the thing that really got to me too. There should be no place for such ill-informed ranting in what is apparently a serious paper.

Grr. Too much to say, not enough words in head right now!

gaius_octavian December 18 2007, 11:19:43 UTC

Next you'll be telling me A A Gill is a serious food critic :-P

sera_squeak December 18 2007, 11:21:09 UTC

*grin*
You mean he's not?

kixie December 18 2007, 11:25:47 UTC

*LAUGHS* I like AA Gill, I saw him give a talk at Hay two years ago and he was hilarious, he seems like the worst person to choose for any objective POV because he's just so cynical and insults EVERYTHING. He's a travel critic who spent a large amount of his talk just slagging all these places off, but in a really funny way for...well, some valid points, like Germany putting a children's amusement area in Buchenwald (!?), or the Japanese hotline for mothers fellate their sons.

He's not serious at all, but he is a good laugh, I think :)

Thread 8

silverfiligree December 18 2007, 11:22:43 UTC

The student discount railcard has an upper age limit. I'm not sure what it is but in my day it was 25.

You might be able to get a 10% discount card from the Gower Street Waterstones. I've got a lecturer's card (hohoho) but I'm pretty sure students can get them too. I honestly can't remember how to apply for it but you could try asking at their enquiry desk.

kixie December 18 2007, 11:23:46 UTC

Well, this guy is far older than I and he has a hell of a lot more money - perhaps he's lying about his age, or things have changed. Must look in to this more.

I will ask, though; my uni is about a stone's throw from Gower Street so that'll be useful! :)

lilfurrydan December 18 2007, 12:49:12 UTC

The student discount railcard has an upper age limit.

There isn't a student railcard; it's a Young Persons railcard. You're entitled to it if you're aged between 16-25, or if you're 26+ in full-time education; if you fit into the latter category, you will need to provide proof of this ;-)

http://www.youngpersons-railcard.co.uk/faqs/eligibility