Ban Bossy

[90sWereBetter]

Just came across this campaign on Twitter.

http://banbossy.com/

http://www.nme.com/news/beyonce/76033

I support gender equality and consider myself to be on the side of feminism, but I think this is a stupid campaign and yet another reason why feminists and feminism gets such a bad reputation nowadays.

Discuss.

 

[GB]

God, all the problems this world has and they chose to focus on that:roll:

 

[TheKnightWho]

God, all the problems this world has and they chose to focus on that:roll:

It probably has a bigger effect than you might think, but this isn't the way to do it. They need to get this sort of thing into teacher education programmes.

 

[Greenback]

I am not convinced there is a problem. Mrs Greenback works in education and has never heard of the term bossy being used in a different way towards females. In her experience the term is equally applied to both sexes.

Personally, I'd be more inclinded to BanTwitter.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Personally, I'd be more inclinded to BanTwitter.

Seconded.

 

[tony_mac]

I am not convinced there is a problem. Mrs Greenback works in education and has never heard of the term bossy being used in a different way towards females. In her experience the term is equally applied to both sexes.

It may depend on the age group;
'bossy' suggests, to me, 'more assertive than they should be, given their station'. Hence, it will be used for small children of both genders. As they get older, I think it does tend to apply more often to females.

(And, there is the old issue - people just don't notice that something isn't applied equally until they specifically start counting!)

They need to get this sort of thing into teacher education programmes.

I think most teachers probably do know better - but I don't consider the upbringing of our children to be something that only teachers should be responsible for.

Yes, of course, there are bigger problems in the world - but that doesn't mean all the smaller ones should be ignored. And this one is just about having a little awareness of how our conditioning can be unintentionally reinforcing negative stereotypes.

(I was made aware of this idea several years ago; I strongly disagreed with it at first, but have slowly come to the realisation that I think they have a point....)

 

[Greenback]

Bossy is a negative term, without a doubt. Maybe I'll change my mind about the campaign now that it been brought to my attention that there may be a gender issue with it as well.

Just because I've never noticed it before doesn't mean it isn't there, so I take your point.

 

[meridian2]

Just came across this campaign on Twitter.

http://banbossy.com/

http://www.nme.com/news/beyonce/76033

I support gender equality and consider myself to be on the side of feminism, but I think this is a stupid campaign and yet another reason why feminists and feminism gets such a bad reputation nowadays.

Discuss.

What a load of PC nonsense. 'Feminisits' are women with chips on their shoulders because something has happened to them in the past. This is obviously started by someone who has had this exact thing, and conveniently, as we live in a PC world where sexism is only sexism if it's against women, this so-called 'campaign' gains credibility. I hope she succeeds, I'll be laughing all the way to my bed.
The best response is to ignore it and hope it goes away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Bossy is a negative term, without a doubt. Maybe I'll change my mind about the campaign now that it been brought to my attention that there may be a gender issue with it as well.

Just because I've never noticed it before doesn't mean it isn't there, so I take your point.

'Bossy' is only negative to people who see discipline as 'too harsh'. People who are deemed to be 'bossy' are told by people where the line is and explained why they shouldn't cross it. If we ban such a word or if the word becomes 'taboo', that line is immediately removed and suddenly, in the blink of an eye, social values have no boundary anymore.

 

[Greenback]

There's nothing wrong with trying to raise an issue which concerns you. The very fact that we are talking about it shows that there is something there to discuss.

As tony_mac says, it may have just gone unnoticed by the majority of us that the word is used more towards young women than it is to young males.

It's definitely something I'll be looking out for in future.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

'Bossy' is only negative to people who see discipline as 'too harsh'. People who are deemed to be 'bossy' are told by people where the line is and explained why they shouldn't cross it.

It is most often used in a negative way though - 'she's too bossy that one' - note the use of the feminine in my example!

Of course, I'd expect my manager to be 'bossy - s/he is my boss! The whole point is the way certain words are used, it's rare to say someone is 'too assertive' as that word ha smore positive connotations.

I'm not convinced that the word bossy is used more towards women, but I;m prepared to keep an open mind about it, thanks to tony_mac.

 

[TheKnightWho]

What a load of PC nonsense. 'Feminisits' are women with chips on their shoulders because something has happened to them in the past. This is obviously started by someone who has had this exact thing, and conveniently, as we live in a PC world where sexism is only sexism if it's against women, this so-called 'campaign' gains credibility. I hope she succeeds, I'll be laughing all the way to my bed.
The best response is to ignore it and hope it goes away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


'Bossy' is only negative to people who see discipline as 'too harsh'. People who are deemed to be 'bossy' are told by people where the line is and explained why they shouldn't cross it. If we ban such a word or if the word becomes 'taboo', that line is immediately removed and suddenly, in the blink of an eye, social values have no boundary anymore.

You are clearly utterly ignorant of the way that how we are brought up affects us in later life. Quite frankly, your idea of discipline and ignoring that certain people have issues is laziness in the extreme. You don't care about it (and don't want to know about it) simply because it doesn't affect you.

I do love your ridiculous scaremongering, though. People have been decrying the decline of social values for hundreds of years - funnily enough, society is better, generally happier and more productive than the 1950s, 1900s, 1850s etc. regardless of what some people with rose-tinted glasses might think.

 

[Clip]

Maybe if women were not so bossy in the first place then maybe they wouldnt have to be bossy in trying to get the word bossy banned the bossy bunch of bollocks.

 

[Darandio]

bossy banned the bossy bunch of bollocks.

I might try and say that later after a few beers. Could be interesting.

 

[Oswyntail]

... 'Feminisits' are women with chips on their shoulders because something has happened to them in the past. ...

Ah, that's where I have been going wrong - being a man, that is.
However, I would suggest that there is a genuinely feminine trait, generally revealed between the ages of about 8 and 13, where an individual seems to take charge of everything in an overly aggressive way. That I would call "bossy", and I have not seen it much among boys of that age. It is not any of the positive characteristics, like "leadership", "self confidence", "dynamism", which i have seen equally among boys and girls. It is a form of bullying, and I would guess that, as usual, the male equivalent is more physical. As usual, if there is a problem, it is with how adults recognise this and deal with it.

 

[meridian2]

You are clearly utterly ignorant of the way that how we are brought up affects us in later life. Quite frankly, your idea of discipline and ignoring that certain people have issues is laziness in the extreme. You don't care about it (and don't want to know about it) simply because it doesn't affect you.

I do love your ridiculous scaremongering, though. People have been decrying the decline of social values for hundreds of years - funnily enough, society is better, generally happier and more productive than the 1950s, 1900s, 1850s etc. regardless of what some people with rose-tinted glasses might think.

Oh please continue, I love how you are now an expert in all things me..

But seriously, this is nothing serious and the fact you're getting all in a twist about it is cracking me up, and symptomatic of a society which, believe me, is taking discipline far less seriously than I am seemingly doing with this....'thing', as I can best describe it as.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Oh please continue, I love how you are now an expert in all things me..

But seriously, this is nothing serious and the fact you're getting all in a twist about it is cracking me up, and symptomatic of a society which, believe me, is taking discipline far less seriously than I am seemingly doing with this....'thing', as I can best describe it as.

Did I ever say I was an expert? I just find it obscene how certain people dismiss things out of hand stuff they've obviously never taken the time to look into.

Like I said - you don't understand the issue if you think the problem is discipline. It's clearly not.

 

[meridian2]

Did I ever say I was an expert? I just find it obscene how certain people dismiss things out of hand stuff they've obviously never taken the time to look into.

Like I said - you don't understand the issue if you think the problem is discipline. It's clearly not.

Look, the link to the site is pretty self-explanatory, what's there not to understand? If the problem isn't discipline, enlighten us, instead of ranting on about my 'ignorance'.

 

[Clip]

Is discipline a nicer way of saying bossy?

 

[Oswyntail]

Is discipline a nicer way of saying bossy?

I don't think so. As I described in my earlier posts, I think "bossiness" is more akin to non-physical bullying. Nothing at all to do with "discipline", which appeared in this thread apparently after a misunderstandling.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I don't think so. As I described in my earlier posts, I think "bossiness" is more akin to non-physical bullying. Nothing at all to do with "discipline", which appeared in this thread apparently after a misunderstandling.

Exactly...

 

[meridian2]

I don't think so. As I described in my earlier posts, I think "bossiness" is more akin to non-physical bullying. Nothing at all to do with "discipline", which appeared in this thread apparently after a misunderstandling.

I think some of my argument has been misrepresented slightly, no misunderstanding at all. I said that if someone was told they were 'bossy', then they knew the line which they must not cross. It's a harsh word and is appropriate. This 'campaign' seeks to outlaw that word, and that, in my view, is representative of a society that doesn't like people being 'hurt', for want of a better word, or people being told in a direct manner that their behaviour is, well, 'bossy'. Yes it can be used as part of disciplining someone, but that was only as an example.
It has virtually no credibility beyond people agreeing with it superficially and just because a major 'pop star' has signed her name to it does not make it so.

And if it is 'non-physical bullying', why create such a drama about it? The person behind this campaign clearly feels wronged by society so why not take it up directly with the catalyst of her need to create this campaign?

 

[TheKnightWho]

I think some of my argument has been misrepresented slightly, no misunderstanding at all. I said that if someone was told they were 'bossy', then they knew the line which they must not cross. It's a harsh word and is appropriate. This 'campaign' seeks to outlaw that word, and that, in my view, is representative of a society that doesn't like people being 'hurt', for want of a better word, or people being told in a direct manner that their behaviour is, well, 'bossy'. Yes it can be used as part of disciplining someone, but that was only as an example.
It has virtually no credibility beyond people agreeing with it superficially and just because a major 'pop star' has signed her name to it does not make it so.

And if it is 'non-physical bullying', why create such a drama about it? The person behind this campaign clearly feels wronged by society so why not take it up directly with the catalyst of her need to create this campaign?

Except that isn't the main point of the campaign. As has been said already, it's about social conditioning: boys are generally rewarded for being 'assertive', whereas girls are put down as being 'bossy' for what amounts to the same behaviour. The campaign seeks to rectify that.

Dismissing PC things out of hand because "people don't like being hurt" is a) insensitive - why should people be needlessly hurt? And b) misses the point.

 

[meridian2]

Except that isn't the main point of the campaign. As has been said already, it's about social conditioning: boys are generally rewarded for being 'assertive', whereas girls are put down as being 'bossy' for what amounts to the same behaviour. The campaign seeks to rectify that.

Rectify what? Obviously the creator of this campaign has been wronged by the actions of someone because they feel as if they were a man, they would've been rewarded for being 'assertive'. It begs the question: why not keep it private and sort the situation out instead of creating something which looks like a publicity stunt?
It undermines the credibility of the campaign and the creator. It may be social conditioning but there are better ways of addressing this issue.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Rectify what? Obviously the creator of this campaign has been wronged by the actions of someone because they feel as if they were a man, they would've been rewarded for being 'assertive'. It begs the question: why not keep it private and sort the situation out instead of creating something which looks like a publicity stunt?
It undermines the credibility of the campaign and the creator. It may be social conditioning but there are better ways of addressing this issue.

Why must it be the personal experience of the creator of the campaign? And obviously they're making it public because it raises awareness - otherwise, what would be the point of any campaign ever?

 

[Greenback]

I don't think it's obvious that the instigator of the campaign has personally experienced being on the receiving end of the word in a negative way.

I got the feeling when I looked at the link that it was more likely to be the work of someone with an interest in and knowledge of language and how it works.

Still, no one can say for definite.

 

[meridian2]

Why must it be the personal experience of the creator of the campaign? And obviously they're making it public because it raises awareness - otherwise, what would be the point of any campaign ever?

Publicity, like I said. :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Still, no one can say for definite.

Which is why people should take no notice of it whatsoever.
Genuine petitions which focus on REAL problems affecting REAL people (Badger cull/Migration of Romanians etc) are fortunately not as indefinite as this rubbish.

 

[Greenback]

Which is why people should take no notice of it whatsoever.
Genuine petitions which focus on REAL problems affecting REAL people (Badger cull/Migration of Romanians etc) are fortunately not as indefinite as this rubbish.

Genuine problems as defined by you? Or are you happy to allow others the right to choose what they consider important enough to support or get involved in?

You have the right not to do anything about this campaign, no one will force you to take any notice of it, so why try and impose your opinion on others?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Some male forum members who grew up with an elder sister could well understand why the word "bossy" could apply to certain young female family members, according to what I have been told.

 

[Greenback]

That may well be true, but the whole point is whether an older brother would be called bossy!

I think that they would, but I have a more open mind now to the possibility that they may not, thanks to this thread.

 

[generalvegitable]

That may well be true, but the whole poin tis whether an older brother would be called bossy!

I think that they would, but I have a more open mind now to the possibility that they may not, thanks to this thread.

You are correct. Having been on the receiving of it for 20 years (although its nowhere near as bad now as it used to be), I think I can safely say that this whole campaign reeks of excrement of the bovine kind.

 

[meridian2]

Genuine problems as defined by you? Or are you happy to allow others the right to choose what they consider important enough to support or get involved in?

You have the right not to do anything about this campaign, no one will force you to take any notice of it, so why try and impose your opinion on others?

Because that's only your opinion that it's a genuine problem 'defined' by me. TheKnightWho's response to my initial post was little more than a rant so if I'm not allowed to debate that because that's 'imposing my opinion on others' then what am I allowed to do?
Stop moving the goalposts on what people can and cannot debate.