Sexism row over new UK passport design, 7 men featured but only 2 women

[Mehrunes]

Honestly you guys. I'm away for a few months and this is what happens?

Ho ho ho, you're all fucking idiots.

Splendid come back you got there.

Easy to say and sounds reasonable, but actually look at what it means. Everyone wants to honour fields that are traditionally male dominated, and more value is assigned to those things, meanwhile work done by women is seen as not real work, not worth honouring, not worth equal pay, and generally just 'busywork for housewives'. The descision to honour X, Y, and Z field may not be conciously sexist, but as a society we decide that male dominated fields tend to be more deserving of honour than female dominated fields, and that leads to situations like this.

If "artists and designers" are a "traditionally male dominated field", then there are no not-male-dominated fields sans gender studies. I'm not sure that nonsense should have been honored on a passport or even toilet paper though.

Again, the mere fact that the people who become well known are men, because work done by women is seen as having less merit, and so is less deserving of praise and fame is an inherently sexist system

Doesn't change the fact that in the past most well known people have been men, including the field the makers of this design wanted to showcase.

[Deleted]

of course there's more men on the passports, 95% (and that's being optimistic) of inventions were made by men

[Underverse]

Scuse me, what is this in the past nonsense.

Yeah, this persistent victim complex is extremely unhealthy.

[Deleted]

Things should be based on merit, not gender.

Step your game up females and do something noteworthy and you'll get rightfully credited?

- - - Updated - - -

of course there's more men on the passports, 95% (and that's being optimistic) of inventions were made by men

No no no.

Logic has no place here.

People should get free passes because they was born a certain gender or race !!

[Revi]

Easy to say and sounds reasonable, but actually look at what it means. Everyone wants to honour fields that are traditionally male dominated, and more value is assigned to those things, meanwhile work done by women is seen as not real work, not worth honouring, not worth equal pay, and generally just 'busywork for housewives'. The descision to honour X, Y, and Z field may not be conciously sexist, but as a society we decide that male dominated fields tend to be more deserving of honour than female dominated fields, and that leads to situations like this..

Seems like they're honoring people who have advanced their fields and society through ingenuity. You could say they chose to assign more value to that because of the genders of 7 out of 9 of the people it would feature, I would say they assign more value to that because it's more impressive, beneficial and conducive to prosperity and progress than the vast majority of female and male dominated professions.

I've never been anywhere that considered things like nursing or teaching "busywork for housewives"

If you can show me that there's a 50/50 representation of women and men behind the significant and impressive discoveries that have progressed western society the past few hundred years, I'll agree they could have done better on their selection. If not, I think you're just asserting sexism because that the lens you see everything through.

[Deleted]

So you're saying that these contributions don't have objective value?

No, I am not saying that. I'm saying that society places subjective value on certain things that overrides their objective value. This is not necessarily a bad thing, since how can you really compare the objective value of anything, that's like trying to determine what objective morality is. But when you place greater subjective value on things that men do, you end up in problematic situations like this.

[klogaroth]

Just sack them all off.

Don't put any people on the passport, there's no need.

It's a document, not a museum.

[Underverse]

No, I am not saying that. I'm saying that society places subjective value on certain things that overrides their objective value. This is not necessarily a bad thing, since how can you really compare the objective value of anything, that's like trying to determine what objective morality is. But when you place greater subjective value on things that men do, you end up in problematic situations like this.

And what is your evidence that we place greater value on the accomplishments of men? Since most inventions in the past have been made by men, having 2 women, if anything, disproportionately favors women.

[Rixis]

What would be the solution to this problem?

[klogaroth]

What would be the solution to this problem?

No people.

If you use any people at all someone will argue with your reasoning for why you've chosen them.

[Tennis]

What would be the solution to this problem?

Treat women fairly

[Kurioxan]

This kind of stuff is silly and easily solvable.

Check records, look at every single major inventor/scientist/scholar/w/e else you want to add in the last 700 years of history
Check how much % of those are women.
Put % representation in the passport.
If its 50% women, put 5 women out of 10 pictures, if its 10% put 1 woman, if its 90% put 9.
To put more is over representation, and thus sexism. Problem solved, continue with life.

[Ryme]

I wish we could just celebrate achievement and not have to worry about what the genitals of the people who achieved it are like.

[zorkuus]

No people.

If you use any people at all someone will argue with your reasoning for why you've chosen them.

You're racist against people.

[GrinningMan]

What do you do about it? Round all the people up.

And shoot them in the head. That way, they can all be put on the passports for their martyrdom of a cause.

[Sky High]

OMG what trite bullshit. it doesn't help the OP has to constantly be on the side of the onxious on all of these issues.

[Underverse]

Treat women fairly

What problem is that intended to solve, and what is your evidence that this does not already occur in a majority of cases?

[Mehrunes]

You're racist against people.

Well, that would be speciesist.

If you can show me that there's a 50/50 representation of women and men behind the significant and impressive discoveries that have progressed western society the past few hundred years, I'll agree they could have done better on their selection. If not, I think you're just asserting sexism because that the lens you see everything through.

No waiii :O

[Rixis]

No people.

If you use any people at all someone will argue with your reasoning for why you've chosen them.

So we should forget the accomplishments of talented people? Every solution is wrong. Put more women on, who, for the time and field being depicted, would mean putting women onto it for lesser accomplishments just to meet a quota. Taking some of the men off is basically the same thing

If they were to do something related to say for example nursing, would we be pissing our pants that there weren't more women on it? What if the new Organ Donor Card depicted Florence Nightingale or someone, but no man. Would we really care?

There are women in history that are not forgotten and are household names, if there doesn't happen to be as many in a specific field, why do people get so worked up about it.

[Underverse]

I wish we could just celebrate achievement and not have to worry about the genitals of the people who achieved it are like.

Yeah. Don't understand why this is still an issue. And a growing issue too...sigh