This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Driving in I heard adverts for this on Radio 4
Can someone explain why this is still appropriate in 2016?
The whole idea makes me want to throw my radio out of the window
Can someone explain why this is still appropriate in 2016?
The whole idea makes me want to throw my radio out of the window
4
10
3
1
In reply to Babika:
I know you are right but I can't contain myself
Just seems such an out of date concept
I know you are right but I can't contain myself
Just seems such an out of date concept
1
1
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
The have a Men's Hour as well, it's on 5 Live.
Women's Hour is obviously a very different programme compared to when it started 70 years ago.
Despite not being its target audience, I usually quite enjoy it when I listen to it.
I prefer Jane Garvey to Jenni Murray.
The have a Men's Hour as well, it's on 5 Live.
Women's Hour is obviously a very different programme compared to when it started 70 years ago.
Despite not being its target audience, I usually quite enjoy it when I listen to it.
I prefer Jane Garvey to Jenni Murray.
13
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
View it more as an advanced warning : The next hour will probably be discussing Female Genital Mutilation, again.
Or as a drinking game where you down a shot every time the phrases "gender inequality", "the pay gap" or "in a way that just wouldnt happen if it was a man" are used.
View it more as an advanced warning : The next hour will probably be discussing Female Genital Mutilation, again.
Or as a drinking game where you down a shot every time the phrases "gender inequality", "the pay gap" or "in a way that just wouldnt happen if it was a man" are used.
11
4
In reply to Ron Rees Davies:
Don't worry. When it has stopped happening, they will probably talk about it less often.
> View it more as an advanced warning : The next hour will probably be discussing Female Genital Mutilation, again.
Don't worry. When it has stopped happening, they will probably talk about it less often.
24
7
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
It does seem a bit predictable sometimes, but then being a woman isn't always all Mai Tais and Yahtzee, even now, so it's probably good to draw attention to this now and again.
The very fact that most respondents to this thread appear to be male is probably encouraging, in a way
> Just seems such an out of date concept
It does seem a bit predictable sometimes, but then being a woman isn't always all Mai Tais and Yahtzee, even now, so it's probably good to draw attention to this now and again.
The very fact that most respondents to this thread appear to be male is probably encouraging, in a way
1
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
don't get me started on women's hour! http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=640528
don't get me started on women's hour! http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=640528
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
it gives the little women something to do while the men retire to the billiard room for port and cigars
it gives the little women something to do while the men retire to the billiard room for port and cigars
5
In reply to mickeyluv:
It is an hour long to remind them that the baking needs taking out of the oven.
It is an hour long to remind them that the baking needs taking out of the oven.
4
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
I'm with you. It is utter dross. Do women really enjoy listening to this carp because I certainly don't. I would even go as far as to find it mildly offensive. And there are 6 hours of it a week! Grrrr.
> Driving in I heard adverts for this on Radio 4
> Can someone explain why this is still appropriate in 2016?
> The whole idea makes me want to throw my radio out of the window
I'm with you. It is utter dross. Do women really enjoy listening to this carp because I certainly don't. I would even go as far as to find it mildly offensive. And there are 6 hours of it a week! Grrrr.
1
In reply to The New NickB:
I was hoping they'd have scrapped it by now, it's terrible and the content is (or was the last time I listened to it years back) a real insult to the intelligence of most men.
Women's hour does suck a bit too, they sell it as a club just for women but surely, if something is important for Woman it's equally important to men, we all live together and knowing what each other's problems are would help to people solve these problems.
Late night women's hour is also a bizarre beast, the adverts for it could be paraphrased as "ooo! we're big girls now and going to have a sleepover where we'll talk about sex and boys!"
> The have a Men's Hour as well, it's on 5 Live.
I was hoping they'd have scrapped it by now, it's terrible and the content is (or was the last time I listened to it years back) a real insult to the intelligence of most men.
Women's hour does suck a bit too, they sell it as a club just for women but surely, if something is important for Woman it's equally important to men, we all live together and knowing what each other's problems are would help to people solve these problems.
Late night women's hour is also a bizarre beast, the adverts for it could be paraphrased as "ooo! we're big girls now and going to have a sleepover where we'll talk about sex and boys!"
4
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
It might be an outdated title but it's a good, well made and relevant programme with interesting topics.
And how are you going to throw your radio out of the window? Have you still got those 2 prongy things to get the car radio out? You shouldn't attempt it whilst driving.
It might be an outdated title but it's a good, well made and relevant programme with interesting topics.
And how are you going to throw your radio out of the window? Have you still got those 2 prongy things to get the car radio out? You shouldn't attempt it whilst driving.
5
In reply to gethin_allen:
Never listened to it. Only listen to 5Live for the sport.
I must have missed that I'm not allowed to listen.
Strange, not the impressive I got. It's not something I listen to, but I did catch 10 minutes of it last night as I was preparing to go to the pub.
It's funny how people interpret the same things differently.
> I was hoping they'd have scrapped it by now, it's terrible and the content is (or was the last time I listened to it years back) a real insult to the intelligence of most men.
Never listened to it. Only listen to 5Live for the sport.
> Women's hour does suck a bit too, they sell it as a club just for women but surely, if something is important for Woman it's equally important to men, we all live together and knowing what each other's problems are would help to people solve these problems.
I must have missed that I'm not allowed to listen.
> Late night women's hour is also a bizarre beast, the adverts for it could be paraphrased as "ooo! we're big girls now and going to have a sleepover where we'll talk about sex and boys!"
Strange, not the impressive I got. It's not something I listen to, but I did catch 10 minutes of it last night as I was preparing to go to the pub.
It's funny how people interpret the same things differently.
2
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
Well I think its very good radio. I could do without the story at the end and I would like a little more self aware humour but it tackles serious issues with intelligence, has a big audience and pisses off misogynists. A win at every level.
Given the claims that the modern world of work is gender neutral here is is an something for the sexists to throw rotten tomatoes at (no shame there... the management of one the most intelligent workforces in the UK remain in denial) :
http://staffblogs.le.ac.uk/management/2016/03/23/im-not-angry-im-just-disap...
Well I think its very good radio. I could do without the story at the end and I would like a little more self aware humour but it tackles serious issues with intelligence, has a big audience and pisses off misogynists. A win at every level.
Given the claims that the modern world of work is gender neutral here is is an something for the sexists to throw rotten tomatoes at (no shame there... the management of one the most intelligent workforces in the UK remain in denial) :
http://staffblogs.le.ac.uk/management/2016/03/23/im-not-angry-im-just-disap...
Post edited at 10:32
3
1
4
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
Women's hour is excellent. The only bad thing about it is that the mid morning slot is somewhat inconvenient for working men......... and women.
Women's hour is excellent. The only bad thing about it is that the mid morning slot is somewhat inconvenient for working men......... and women.
Post edited at 11:10
In reply to Robert Durran:
Depends what sort of work - but I broadly agree. Agree with whoever said Jane Garvey was preferable to Jenni Murray. I've only really started listening in the last year or so whilst trundling in to university, and on the whole I enjoy it, but I wouldn't say any more or less than numerous other programmes on R4, some of which I'm surprised to find myself listening to and enjoying (the more science-based ones, for instance).
Depends what sort of work - but I broadly agree. Agree with whoever said Jane Garvey was preferable to Jenni Murray. I've only really started listening in the last year or so whilst trundling in to university, and on the whole I enjoy it, but I wouldn't say any more or less than numerous other programmes on R4, some of which I'm surprised to find myself listening to and enjoying (the more science-based ones, for instance).
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
Do actual humans still listen to radio 4?
We have podcasts now. And Spotify. You're all outdated.
Do actual humans still listen to radio 4?
We have podcasts now. And Spotify. You're all outdated.
1
6
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
I quite enjoy it. Like any show, content doesn't always appeal, but it's just another angle on life.
Although I had to grit my teeth earlier in the week when they were raving about what a genius revolutionary Beyoncé was....
I quite enjoy it. Like any show, content doesn't always appeal, but it's just another angle on life.
Although I had to grit my teeth earlier in the week when they were raving about what a genius revolutionary Beyoncé was....
3
In reply to bouldery bits:
If push came to shove, I'd quite happily trade the Internet in favour of the radio. I think it's a beautiful medium.
If push came to shove, I'd quite happily trade the Internet in favour of the radio. I think it's a beautiful medium.
5
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
A very good programme. I'd rather keep up with Woman's Hour than the Kardashians. But The Archers has lost a loyal listener since Rob Titchner is still alive. Could Kirsty please jam him down a culvert and the scriptwriters arrange for an unseasonal flood to occur whilst the rest of the country is in the grip of a heatwave. I've had it!
A very good programme. I'd rather keep up with Woman's Hour than the Kardashians. But The Archers has lost a loyal listener since Rob Titchner is still alive. Could Kirsty please jam him down a culvert and the scriptwriters arrange for an unseasonal flood to occur whilst the rest of the country is in the grip of a heatwave. I've had it!
5
In reply to bouldery bits:
I do (if that counts).
Don't you need one of those new smart phone thingys to listen to podcasts? And what the hell is a spotify?
> Do actual humans still listen to radio 4?
I do (if that counts).
> We have podcasts now. And Spotify. You're all outdated.
Don't you need one of those new smart phone thingys to listen to podcasts? And what the hell is a spotify?
Post edited at 13:04
2
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
It has lots of interesting stuff but should really be renamed "feminist hour". It drives many women to distraction, let alone men, on the basis of the underlying assumptions it implicitly makes about attitudes and conditions of both women and men.
One basic failing is that when discussing subjects that affect women, eg. ageism, they consistently fail to address whether such issues are unique to women, and if not (they often aren't), how womens' experience is different to men. Given that 40% of the listenership is male one might think that this would be an appropriate approach.
Jenni Murray seems simply to be unable to comprehend that her particular values are not shared by millions of decent people of both sexes.
> Driving in I heard adverts for this on Radio 4
> Can someone explain why this is still appropriate in 2016?
> The whole idea makes me want to throw my radio out of the window
It has lots of interesting stuff but should really be renamed "feminist hour". It drives many women to distraction, let alone men, on the basis of the underlying assumptions it implicitly makes about attitudes and conditions of both women and men.
One basic failing is that when discussing subjects that affect women, eg. ageism, they consistently fail to address whether such issues are unique to women, and if not (they often aren't), how womens' experience is different to men. Given that 40% of the listenership is male one might think that this would be an appropriate approach.
Jenni Murray seems simply to be unable to comprehend that her particular values are not shared by millions of decent people of both sexes.
Post edited at 13:26
3
In reply to Postmanpat:
There you go with your broad brush labels.. Feminists just believe in equal political, economic and social rights for women. I suspect the feminists who bug you are a small subset of the wider range of women. Plenty of men call themselves feminists in the wider equality sense... I do.
Maybe some people listen to get angry as those numbers are pretty big for a radio show.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman%27s_Hour
There you go with your broad brush labels.. Feminists just believe in equal political, economic and social rights for women. I suspect the feminists who bug you are a small subset of the wider range of women. Plenty of men call themselves feminists in the wider equality sense... I do.
Maybe some people listen to get angry as those numbers are pretty big for a radio show.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman%27s_Hour
2
In reply to Offwidth:
So do I, and so do the women I am referring to. That is why they get and I get irritated by the programme; because it over represents the views of a more radical view of feminism and treats them as "mainstream".
> There you go with your broad brush labels.. Feminists just believe in equal political, economic and social rights for women. I suspect the feminists who bug you are a small subset of the wider range of women. Plenty of men call themselves feminists in the wider equality sense... I do.
So do I, and so do the women I am referring to. That is why they get and I get irritated by the programme; because it over represents the views of a more radical view of feminism and treats them as "mainstream".
3
1
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:
I caught some of it last week and they were discussing ... why men don't fart openly, like men. High-brow, radio 4 listening at its best.
I caught some of it last week and they were discussing ... why men don't fart openly, like men. High-brow, radio 4 listening at its best.
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
Thought this debate a week or so back was quite interesting. Edwina Currie went up in my estimation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36092802
Something a bit odd about Womans Hour. I sort of feel its remit is to give women a voice and break down inequalities of the sexes. Yet its subject matter seems to more or less revolve around good practice in the kitchen, how to iron, and other rather quaint and old fashioned "women's" areas.
Thought this debate a week or so back was quite interesting. Edwina Currie went up in my estimation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36092802
Something a bit odd about Womans Hour. I sort of feel its remit is to give women a voice and break down inequalities of the sexes. Yet its subject matter seems to more or less revolve around good practice in the kitchen, how to iron, and other rather quaint and old fashioned "women's" areas.
1
In reply to David Martin:
No, to be fair (and of course I am always scrupulously so) , as a magazine programme it effectively balances the serious and "political" with the less serious "entertainment". The problem is that, when dong the former, it is incapable of challenging or even recognising its own assumptions.
> Thought this debate a week or so back was quite interesting. Edwina Currie went up in my estimation.
> Something a bit odd about Womans Hour. I sort of feel its remit is to give women a voice and break down inequalities of the sexes. Yet its subject matter seems to more or less revolve around good practice in the kitchen, how to iron, and other rather quaint and old fashioned "women's" areas.
No, to be fair (and of course I am always scrupulously so) , as a magazine programme it effectively balances the serious and "political" with the less serious "entertainment". The problem is that, when dong the former, it is incapable of challenging or even recognising its own assumptions.
In reply to David Martin:
I heard that and found myself shouting at the radio... :-/ Mostly at Edwina Currie...
I heard that and found myself shouting at the radio... :-/ Mostly at Edwina Currie...
In reply to Robert Durran:
It is a flightless bird. A bit like a haggis.
> And what the hell is a spotify?
It is a flightless bird. A bit like a haggis.
In reply to iusedtoclimb:
I think that overall it is not a bad programme, but it does seem not to have caught up and the story part often seems mediocre at best. Occasionally I get riled when they present things in a sexist way, just the sort of thing that they would perhaps accuse men of in the past.
I think that overall it is not a bad programme, but it does seem not to have caught up and the story part often seems mediocre at best. Occasionally I get riled when they present things in a sexist way, just the sort of thing that they would perhaps accuse men of in the past.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...