Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia
A little cultural misappropriation there. I'll overlook it for the sake of the thread, though.
I have known several Women's Officers in various jobs. I have never met one who is male. It's hilarious really. I mean, think of the face of the average 19 year old male when the conversation gets around to menstruation. I can't see him joining in the conversation, really. More hilarious that there are posts in this thread claiming he might have been "the right person for the job".
|
Why is that hilarious? This thread is about somebody's job role and people don't seem to want to discuss what the actual role will involve and what education and training and experience Lily might have in relation to that. Yes 19 seems really young, and someone who isn't biologically a woman taking on a womans role of course sounds bizarre on the face of it. But can we not look at it any deeper that? People are bringing up things like menstruation/womens rights and issues/things that can only affect a biological female and stating that the person in this role needs to have first hand experience of these things, but I haven't seen anything that relates to womens rights and womens personal issues in the actual role description, and surely that should be the center of what this debate is about? I find it bizarre that that is being ignored and replaced with issues that from what I've read don't seem to factor into the role, and that people who want to actually consider and discuss those things should be mocked for it? That when discussing someone's job role the idea that they might be competent at it is something that shouldn't even be considered because on the surface it seems unusual, and that because it hasn't happened before it's something that should never happen.