Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
[i]I wonder how many people have sent her a message saying "cor your fit"[/i]
They'll be rejected straight away for their failure at basic grammar.
Not sure how you get that from this
If it's not relevant, why mention it.
The message was sexist (was it? Misogynistic yes, but I'd infer that it was if anything positive sexist discrimination), but there's an inference in her response as it says [i]"think twice before sending another woman half your age such a sexist message."[/i] not [i]"think twice before sending another woman such a sexist message."[/i].
Reductio ad absurdum; she's being sexist by including the word woman, would it be ok if he was sending blokes similar messages?
Suggesting he's a 'dirty old man' would be my guess.
Was she wearing sensible shoes?
@ crankboy - are there any guidelines laid down by the Law Society (?) as to what form a photo on Linkedin should take? For example colour or black and white, full face, close up, styled or a natural look, smile or not, professional photographer.
Also does it need approval from an employer?
she reminds me of people on here looking for something to get angry about
How dare you tarnish the rest of us STW's 👿
cinnamon_girl "are there any guidelines laid down by the Law Society "not that I am aware of but general rule not to bring the profession into disrepute . There was some media guidance rather than guidelines which from memory boiled down to don't wear pinstripes it makes you look like a spiv.
I imagine the sort of employers that value linked in would specify the sort of portrait you could display and have a firm word or policy for the blatantly inappropriate.
I am on linked in and linked to loads of random lawyers my firm has no interest in my linked in profile or connections and I have no idea of any "value" in being on it.(I joined as I needed to contact a colleague who had moved to the commercial world to pass on bad news and had no other means of contact )
Thanks crankboy, that's helpful. Chuckled at pinstripes though. 🙂
I am on linked in and linked to loads of random lawyers my firm has no interest in my linked in profile or connections and I have no idea of any "value" in being on it.
I think it's for people who like to "network" instead of "talk to someone." I don't really get it either. I've a bunch of connections who are co-workers or former co-workers, a few who are friends in the same line of work as me, and that's about it.
I keep getting random requests from people I've never heard of, people who I know but who probably think it's another Facebook ("how do you know this person?" - um, shagged her once?), and generally people who I have no working relationship with beyond sharing the same office space occasionally. I've broadly ignored all these, whether that's the 'right' way of doing LI I've no idea, probably a topic for a separate thread.
About the only use I've found for it is the Social Connector plugin for Outlook, which scrapes LI for profile pictures and so puts faces to names of external contacts I've never actually met. Maybe I should email a few of them to tell them their profile picture is stunning, what could possibly go wrong?
[url= http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/09/boss-of-top-legal-aid-firm-vows-to-never-instruct-linkedin-message-barrister-charlotte-proudman-again/ ]Other lawyers are also being silly about this - let me introduce Franklin Sinclair....[/url]
That's terrible. They were sending her underwear?!
The “sexist” LinkedIn message row just got real as the head of one of the UK’s biggest legal aid firms vowed to send “no more briefs” to Charlotte Proudman.
[img] 
[/img]
Other lawyers are also being silly about this - let me introduce Franklin Sinclair....
Bottom Half Of The Internet Syndrome aside, it's astonishing how many of the commenters (on both sides of the argument) on that article are missing the point.
It's not sexist because he "paid her a compliment," it's sexist because she is working in a male-dominated profession, he is presumably a considerably senior worker in the same field and so in a position of power, and the thing he focused on for the bulk of his email was what she looked like rather than the fact that she's a barrister. That's why it's sexist; it's also condescending and demeaning.
Christ, and now they've got me resorting to mansplaining, kill me onw.
I'm glad I'm married. It's going to be impossible to chat a woman up in a few years time.
whatever the rights and wrongs, outing it all on twitter is a shit thing to do, and she demonstrates considerable immaturity in doing so. Whatever she thinks she may have gained for her cause, it has seriously damaged her professional reputation.
That said, I am soooo glad we didn't have all this social media malarky when I was young and stupid 🙂
I'm glad I'm married. It's going to be impossible to chat a woman up in a few years time.
No it's not. You just need to start with an opening gambit of "hi, what's your name?" rather than "hey, nice tits love." There [i]are [/i]situations where "fancy a shag" might well be an appropriate greeting, but most people don't go to those sorts of clubs or parties and it's less appropriate in the baked goods aisle in Tesco.
Sadly, the concept being respectful to women (or indeed to anyone who isn't themself) seems to be lost on far more men than I ever thought likely.
Also, I'm now banned from Tesco's.
Also, I'm now banned from Tesco's.
Maybe you should move. That sort of thing is de rigeur in Sainsburys in Colne.
Or you could trade down to Asda. Though it has now been pointed out to me that the staff don't actually want you to pat their arses.
Pff. You'll be telling me next that Asda Price isn't Katie's sister.
it's less appropriate in the baked goods aisle in Tesco.
To be fair her Baps were lovely.
IGMC
Well whatever her intentions, she's got her name and face all over the media now... I doubt this was what she intended.
I think going public with his name and with what was otherwise private communication seems disproportionate - a bit like a driver trying to run you off the road for riding primary in heavy traffic - the punishment is not justified by the perceived provocation.
I think the point that for a barrister to be making private communications public is inappropriate is an interesting one - it'll be interesting to see how this impacts her on a professional level.
IME it's generally best not to court controversy if you want to gain trust and respect of colleagues and clients/prospective clients, as few people welcome it. How would you know you wouldn't be the next person who makes a comment she finds offensive? <disclaimer, I'm not saying what he said wasn't offensive, but I doubt he expected this outcome - if he had, you can bet your bottom dollar he wouldn't have replied to her LinkedIn invite>
There's plenty of barristers to choose from and for those clients who simply want to win their case and are seeking discretion (most?) I suspect they'd think twice about choosing her in future. Notoriety is usually only a positive selling point in a few scenarios e.g. music, art, celebrity nonsense...
Bloody hell - you should see my Linkedin connections list - 80%+ are female and of those probably 95% have profile pics more suited to Facebook or Tinder `NOT a "professional network".
Considering many of them are lawyers, surveyors, HR, H&S, etc _ at least I know what they'll look like semi naked if I ever ask one of them out 😆
How naive cougar. If, you try, to chat a woman up, you've made an implication that she's physically attractive. You're therefore a misogynist pig and oppressor of women.
How naive cougar. If, you try, to chat a woman up, you've made an implication that she's physically attractive. You're therefore a misogynist pig and oppressor of women.
You know those jokes that have gone on a bit too long and you're no longer sure if the person is joking or 'joking'?
Oh dear, seems if the shoes on the other foot it's fine.
Cougar - Moderator
Pff. You'll be telling me next that Asda Price isn't Katie's sister.POSTED 6 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
Junkyard - lazarus
it's less appropriate in the baked goods aisle in Tesco.To be fair her Baps were lovely.
IGMC
[img]
[/img]
Oh dear, seems if the shoes on the other foot it's fine.
Only if you can't read.
The keystone of that entire article is:
However, it emerged yesterday that the award-winning human rights barrister has commented on pictures of men on Facebook herself to praise their looks.
She also told female friends they looked ‘sexy’ and ‘stunning’ – the same word used by Mr Carter-Silk.On the profile of a postgraduate student at Cambridge, where Miss Proudman is on sabbatical from her chambers to study for a PhD, she wrote: ‘Hot stuff!’, while under an image of a long-haired male friend, she wrote: ‘oooo lalala!’
Beneath photos from women, she was also happy to compliment their looks, saying to different friends: ‘Oh ladies, wowwweeeeee!!!!!!’, ‘wow! stunning!!!!’ and ‘Sexy lady!’
Do I need to go through that with a highlighter pen, marking out that it was on "Facebook" and that she was commenting on "friends"? Seriously, is this where we're at now, if I tell my wife she's looking sexy today then it's ok for someone I've never met before to say the same thing to me on a job interview? That's totally the same situation?
Seriously, is this where we're at now, if I tell my wife she's looking sexy today then it's ok for someone I've never met before to say the same thing to me on a job interview?
Depends, is the interview for a lingerie model or an exotic dancer?
marking out that it was on "Facebook"
Tbf, for me Facebook is a far more "professional" environment than LinkedIn will ever be. Everything I do on Facebook is now done in the context of 'can this bite me in the arse'
Same goes for comments on any social networking site. Including this one.
The Daily Mail have called her a Feminazi this morning, all across the top of the front page, stay classy Daily Mail 🙄
That's totally the same situation?
The point is that they are not totally dissimilar
Unfortunately, weak though it is , she has been hoisted up by her own petard.
Reality is some humans objectify and comment on folks looks and she is amongst them. To some degree we all are and not all of it is sexism / letching, some of it is and some of it is not.
I would not wish to defend either of them at this time and I certainly would not want to launch personal attacks on here.
Both were unwise and the reaction to both actions were predictable.
The DM really is a bag of shit.
if I tell my wife she's looking sexy today then it's ok for someone I've never met before to say the same thing to me on a job interview? That's totally the same situation?
Seems a bit of an unlikely, contrived example: your wife is pretty sexy, I don't think there's much risk of you getting that kind of comment though TBH.
Well whatever her intentions, she's got her name and face all over the media now... I doubt this was what she intended.
I would imagine that's exactly what she intended otherwise she'd have kept the complaints out of the public eye. Someone intent on keeping out of the media doesn't start the ball rolling with twitter rather than the professional standards lot.
she wrote: ‘Hot stuff!’, while under an image of a long-haired male friend, she wrote: ‘oooo lalala!’
Oooh the sexist looking-like-cassadra-from-only-fools-and-horses little pig!!!!!
Do I need to go through that with a highlighter pen, marking out that it was on "Facebook" and that she was commenting on "friends"?
I do get the difference between a 'professional' social media like linkedin and a 'social' social media like Facebook; however just because contacts on FB are called 'friends' doesn't mean they really are. I have FB friends who I'd never make that sort of comment about, so to say that just because it was on FB makes it Ok is not correct. It might be, it might not, you'd have to ask the commentee to see how they feel about it.
@wrecker She's not sexist, she makes [u]potentially[/u] inappropriate comments about both male and female friends / acquaintances. Stupid, maybe.
Objectification is objectification, no?
If she's not sexist, neither is the other solicitor.
There is a consent element to it
Most people in a relationship will be objectified to some degree and that is to be expected and enjoyed
One may for example compliment your partner on a great rack [ I have seen the pics of some STW men folk and this can be said either way 😉 ]
I dont think this means we can then say this to a random stranger.
The same works here with what we say to friends v what we say to strangers. they are not the same and wont be taken the same way.
Nuance innit.
I dont think either example here is that bad tbh both have been foolish and she was always going to do this and the media were always going to do this.
Objectification is different to sexism. They are both potentially guilty of that (potentially in her case because it's impossible to know whether her comments are appropriate ones in the context of them being to her friends, or inappropriate ones to 'friends on FB')
Sexism or gender discrimination is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender.
The original case is about making inappropriate comments to her, assumed to be because she is young, female and attractive; the absence of a similar history of comments to young good looking male barristers suggests a degree of discrimination.
Hence he is sexist, there's nothing so far to say she is.
Bit late to the party, but...
Great, another twonk using social media and the news to further a career that's probably not going anywhere so try use their indignation over something that, again, could be handled in house, but the. That doesn't get you the attention you so desperately crave.
Yes, the guy was wrong, there's no mistaking that, but running to Twitter is not the answer and you'll now be forever tarred as the troublemaker nobody wants to work with.
People need to get back to realising that their posts in social media have consequences once you put them out there, but then again, I'm pretty sure that was the sole purpose here.
I'm willing to bet good money had it been a 29 year old, model good looks kinda guy, that had made the same comment she would have taken the compliment and we would never have heard about it. There's an agenda going on here (what a surprise)
The same works here with what we say to friends v what we say to strangers.
Yeah I get that, but what if the recipient (FB "friend" in this case) did not want to be commented on in that manner by her? (equivalent to phwoooar) in the same way that she did not want to be commented on by the old letch.
Same thing.
Totally agree with theotherjonv.... . Shame the DM readership wont see the latest "developments" in this story in the same way. WTF is "feminazi" supposed to mean anyway? Argh.
just because contacts on FB are called 'friends' doesn't mean they really are. I have FB friends who I'd never make that sort of comment about, so to say that just because it was on FB makes it Ok is not correct.
Oh come on. Sure, there are people on FB it would be inappropriate to say something that to. I've "friends" who I went to school with, barely said two words to when I was there and haven't spoken to since, and the same applies; an opening gambit of how stunning they are would be inappropriate. Doesn't make my point any less valid, FB is absolutely awash with comments along the lines of "looking hot today!" or, being Facebook, "my gawjuss dorta, wit woo." I'm pretty certain that none of those comments are exchanges between complete strangers trying to establish a professional working relationship.
I'm willing to bet good money had it been a 29 year old, model good looks kinda guy, that had made the same comment she would have taken the compliment and we would never have heard about it. There's an agenda going on here (what a surprise)
+1
Your point was that because it was to friends on facebook that [i]suggested[/i] it was OK. I'm saying it isn't automatically OK, depends whether they are friends or 'FB friends'. You can neither convict her (as the DM seems to be trying to do) or acquit her of objectification based on what we know at this point.
The fact that FB is full of similar comments doesn't make it OK
[edit - although if i had to place a bet i'd say probably they are genuine friends who will be flattered by the comments and no offence has been meant or taken. And the DM is trying to shitstir. It usually is]
Same thing.
Yes and No
Context matters
I'm pretty certain that none of those comments are exchanges between complete strangers trying to establish a professional working relationship.
I'm pretty certain that none of those comments are exchanges between complete strangers trying to establish a professional working relationship.
TBF, I think only one of those strangers was trying to establish a working relationship.
That is kinda the point
She tried this he "Hit" on here
It is on R4 womans hour now
Should be right up your street Wrecker 😛
they called it a kerfuffle
Hmmm, I think a lot of the comments on here are correct in that one sentence of his reply to her email was ill judged, and her response was totally nobbish, but what is really winding me up is that everywhere she talks about it as him having approached her - which he did not do, he responded to a request to add her to his network.
Clearly it's worked for her unfortunately as she's got massive amounts of publicity, but if my wife or daughter were subject to sexual discrimination and I was looking for a good lawyer would I choose her? Absolutely not.
Also, if a female partner in a firm had made the same comment, would she have taken offence? Now who's being sexist?
(It does come across letchy, but not sexist per se.)
I'm saying it isn't automatically OK, depends whether they are friends or 'FB friends'. You can neither convict her (as the DM seems to be trying to do) or acquit her of objectification based on what we know at this point.
No, and I wasn't saying either of those things either. I'm not quite sure why you think I was.
I'm saying that the DM's assertion that she's as bad as he is because she's commented on - and it uses the word "friends" explicitly, several times - the looks of her friends on Facebook is a straw man. The two situations aren't even remotely similar. As is often the case, context is king; it's like comparing a job interview with going to the pub.
The bloke - a "senior partner at a law firm" - responded to her request to work together with a bunch of comments effusing about her profile picture and mentioned her skills practically as an afterthought, and he knew he was being "politically incorrect" when he did it. Now, let's not get all bogged down on whether it's sexist or not; what it [i]is[/i] is unprofessional, disrespectful and patronising. To suggest that it's somehow ok because she's also complimented friends on Facebook who [i]probably aren't expecting to be valued by their professional merit[/i] when they post selfies is disingenuous at best.
Is it just me? Can we really not see how one of these things is not like the others? Did no-one else watch Sesame Street?
WTF is "feminazi" supposed to mean anyway?
In the world of the Daily Mail, "woman who dares to question a man" I think.
They do have a shred of a point based on how she's handled it (which as I said at the outset was way OTT); I may be doing her a disservice but she does come across as the sort of person who was spoiling for exactly this sort of response, and to an extent perhaps he's played right into her hands. But the DM quote there smacks of victim-blaming to me, if we can handwave this sort of Gene Hunt casual sexism by attacking her instead then it allows the Old Boys' Network to carrying on being old boys; what was she thinking of playing at being a barrister anyway, she should be bringing tea for the men or staying at home squeezing out the next generation of misogynists, the silly little girl.
Sexist Porcine Lawyer described his own daughter as HOT?
I think this poor guy is being victimised for stating the obvious
The photo of his daughter excercising, She does indeed look hot ,this is byproduct of physical activity in a gym, of course I thinK she also looks hot.
I may be doing her a disservice but she does come across as the sort of person who was spoiling for exactly this sort of response,
Having listened to her on womans hours you do her no such dis service
IMHO
That is not an attack of her but many feminists are only to happy and willing to find and highlight sexism
Worth listening to the Woman's Hour segment - she gives her side of the story
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0694zx8 ]Woman's Hour[/url]
She admits she had an agenda in posting it on Twitter... to highlight incidences of everyday sexism - which is fair enough. I do think they should have called her out though on why she didn't anonymise the man in question if this was her agenda... easily done to a screen shot and without putting his reputation on the line.
In defence of the points that she may have ruined her career she focussed on those who say she has 'bitten the hand that feeds' which is a focus on the politics of the matter, not those who've pointed out that 'no client will trust you' angle which I think is a very realistic and, from the point of view of clients, a quite reasonable perspective.
Should be right up your street Wrecker
Think I'll give it a miss, but thanks for the heads up.
Given that she is trying to become a media type with bits of work on the radio and in the press then I suspect this is just a publicity stunt to raise her profile.
Obviously a no news day. It's such a non-story as to be a total waste of bandwidth and print. She's clearly manipulating social media to her advantage (no problem with that) but in a negative way. Shame it's backfired on her.
Move along now. Nothing to see here.
Both her and the lurker come across as complete tosspots. Made me count my blessings I didn't go into law.
This is 4 hours of her twitter feed. If she was looking to provoke a reaction she's succeeded.
[url= https://medium.com/@martinbelam/a-four-hour-window-into-the-storm-of-abuse-feminazi-lawyer-charlotte-proudman-faces-on-twitter-b654f5fa36ce ]https://medium.com/@martinbelam/a-four-hour-window-into-the-storm-of-abuse-feminazi-lawyer-charlotte-proudman-faces-on-twitter-b654f5fa36ce[/url]
WARNING: contains quite a lot of NSFW language.
This is 4 hours of her twitter feed.
I glanced over a short section of that. Just goes to show what absolute morons use Twitter.
Am I the only one who would really like to see her dressed up as " That one off the Bill"?........Just me then?
[img] 
[/img]
A Roman centurion?
Probably just you, tbh.
I glanced over a short section of that. Just goes to show what absolute morons [s]use Twitter.[/s] exist.
FTFY.
Have to love the fact that a lady who feels so violated chooses to make such an effort with the LI photo - no really.
Yeah, she should've just posted a photo of herself in curlers or out on the lash. That always makes a good impression in legal circles.
Well she went to great lengths to find the same stylist as He Man, didn't she? ?
[img] 
[/img]
All my staff have professional photos - they don't need the glammed up look. They consider THAT demeaning and unnecessary as they are professionals.
No justification for the comments from the partner - plain stupid. But the irony of the whole thing can't go unnoticed.
I have watched plenty of professional (?) service women use their looks to advance their work and then pull the discrimination card when things go pear shaped later. The whole thing is absurdly unbalanced.
All my staff have professional photos
Only today you were telling us, when asked if you had a degree in economics
Yes thanks and a 100% A*/A hit rate with tutees. Why?*
Its quite a busy and diverse working life you lead what with the teaching and employing all your staff and monitoring their linkedin.
I am glad you find time to post on here as that job sounds awfully strange not to mention busy.
Any analysis would show which gender has it toughest, out of interest have you ever seen a woman hit the glass ceiling or had a harder time due to gender? I am sure you treat your tutees and staff equally well but somewhere else in your working life? Surely you must have as it seems so diverse and extensive
* http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/living-wage-inflation/page/2#post-7166695
All my staff have professional photos - they don't need the glammed up look. They consider THAT demeaning and unnecessary as they are professionals.
+1
You can't find a single work related photo or bio of me anywhere. No linkedin, absent from company website, name kept off promotional and press stuff.
In an age when it seems the norm to prostitute yourself to anyone and everyone, apparently I'm being silly, but I get a strange satisfaction of being "ungoogleable" professionally. That said, I don't need to win any work, so can see why those who need to drum up clients would find it beneficial/necessary.
So she's ageist and he's sexist?
Shame really 'cos if they were French they could just bang and smoke, bang and smoke, write existentialist poetry, smoke, bang then lounge about looking bored with each other in a sultry fashion.
"PaPa"
[i]"Nicole"[/i]
"No PaPa"
[i]"Nicole"[/i]
"Meh. Ok"
Its quite a busy and diverse working life you lead what with the teaching and employing all your staff and monitoring their linkedin.
All that work must make him sweaty
they don't need the glammed up look
Are we talking about the same photo? It's mildly flattering sure, but it's not going to be on the cover of Vogue any time soon.
Are we talking about the same photo? It's mildly flattering sure, but it's not going to be on the cover of Vogue any time soon.
It's a woman trying to look good. Obviously she is asking for it, and deserves whatever she gets.
Its quite a busy and diverse working life you lead what with the teaching and employing all your staff and monitoring their linkedin.
True, but it's important to keep tabs on what's going on below stairs.
😀 How very true 😀
[img] 
[/img]
better not hold the door open for her, likely to get a mouth full of abuse for being misogynic
Some of-em are real tetchy don't you find usually their time of the month 😉
Can imagine there is much moral outrage and bants going on in the silly kids playground Twitter and Facebook. Well really who takes it seriously or gives a flying f$$k about these uppty, self-promoting, narcissistic, adult children and their by-proxy squabblings about nothing!
On Newsnignt tonight FWIW
Gonna record it incase she's looking 'hot' 😆
Oh my christ, I can't believe this is still dragging on! GO AWAY!
She came across as a goon.