Discussion in 'The Human Condition' started by Yithian, Jan 19, 2004.
In what way is it applied to men?
I have never, ever heard this term in anything other than in relation to women.
Have you heard of 'the male menopause'? It's a thing.
I have heard of the "manopause". It's a thing but a different thing. Menopause is specifically the cessation of menstruation. The clue is in the name!
You mean ‘Manopause’.
The Manopause is when you get hot flushes, red-faced and become right wing and a racist bigot. It’s an unpreventable change. Like hair sprouting out of your ever-growing nose and ears.
Mytho, people who do not menstruate and ovulate do not get a menopause.
Edit: Just to reassure male members (you know what I mean) I've seen a couple more articles suggesting that some medical professionals prefer the more gender-specific term 'andropause', and that it doesn't necessarily always mean a sudden drop in testosterone once you get past 50, although there is generally a slow decrease over time. And yet the Male Menopause remains a recognised Thing - a package of age-related symptoms - including weight gain, depression and difficulty concentrating (except on fast red cars, leather trousers and secretaries) and physical changes.
It's probably simpler to just decide that regardless of gender you're pretty much knackered after about 27 :-(
Which might explain those dead rock stars.
I don't believe that Ben Broadbent knowingly set out to offend a few middle-aged women.
He was searching for a metaphor to describe an economy that was mature but with diminishing productivity.
It's an original, slightly odd and arguably clumsy metaphor but surely only the professionally offended would have such a hissy fit about it?
Odd that the world of economics have never developed a word for this. I’ve just had to look through a financial document and apart from this, they seem to have EVERY eventuality covered in minute detail.
Not an attempt to lash out at the nearest un-PC person, this, more a clumsy admixture of our old friend Virtue Signalling and the demonising of 'Brexiteers' - who, with starling originality and faultless logic, we're reminded are 'Daily Mail readers'.
If I understand any of this correctly, Moffat himself chose not to genderbend the Doc earlier because some viewers hate women or something. Yet the headline states quite plainly that it was these notional Doctor deserters who are directly responsible.
You might have noticed this sort of blurring-of- cause-and-effect tactic frequently from BBC News, for (fictional) example by way of illustration:
Activist(s) kick up stink on social media over picture on box of breakfast cereal being transphobic.
BBC reports "Cereal packaging sparks transphobia row"
Followed by "Here's why you probably thought it was still OK to buy transphobic museli in 2018"
Here's the story:
Steven Moffat: Brexit voters delayed female Doctor
The outgoing head writer of Doctor Who has defended his decision not to
cast a female lead during his tenure, to retain viewers who "voted Brexit"
"No-one had any problem" with long-running character Master being turned into Missy, he said, adding: "But we have to worry about our Daily Mail-reading viewers saying, 'That's not the same person!' This isn't a show exclusively for progressive liberals; this is also for people who voted Brexit."
Just to be clear on what Broadbent *actually* said and the context in which he said it.
In an interview with the Telegraph he compared the UK economy to the “climacteric” growth of the 1880s and (presumably when the journalist looked at him blankly) went on to clarify that the word mean “menopausal, but can apply to both genders... it means you’ve passed your productive peak”.
So there you go. Stay your pitchforks. Or, maybe sharpen them. I’m sure there’ll be anothe source for faux outrage tomorrow.
Not wishing to trivialise the issue...this is confusing to me as try as I might I keep picturing Jim Broadbent, the popular actor, being chased across a barren moor.
That’s quite poetic.
Indeed. One might become a social leper.
Must admit that one misappropriation of a medical condition that does annoy me is the American usage of "dumb", which describes an inability to speak (usually resulting from congenital deafness) , but is gaining traction as a synonym for "stupid".
Somewhat agree, yet we've been talking about 'dumb animals' (that's probably speciesist Hate Speech now) for a long, long time. Plenty of English words have contextual double meanings without causing confusion.
For once, Min, I don't entirely agree with your first sentence, although I am in accord with the rest of your post. I think the reaction to criticism of his remark is very much a freedom of speech issue: we're supposed to tolerate, nay, welcome the public airing of much more reprehensible views from people with legitimate economic concernsracists, sexists and other bigots - see eg some of the appalling posts on the Islam threads on this very website - due to the fetishisation of this notion of freedom of speech or, in a slightly more sophisticated version, appeals to the "marketplace of ideas". Yet, strangely enough, as soon as some counter-opinions are brought to that marketplace, for example that perhaps we might consider being a little more respectful of women, or people of colour, or other minorities, the very same voices speak up in a chorus of "censorship" and "PC gorn mad". Isn't that strange? It's almost as though for some people "freedom of speech" means the freedom to say all manner of offensive things and not then be called out on it.
I'd be fascinated to see what you regard as an appalling post concerning Islam. Perhaps you'd be good enough to direct me to one or two exemplars you regard as particularly iniquitous.
Not at all.
Mr Broadbent was entitled to use his rather odd metaphor. People are equally entitled to say they didn’t like it. And, other people are entitled to say that the objectors appear to be overreacting and looking for things to be offended about.
That’s free speech. It *becomes* censorship or PC gone mad at the point that one side says “you’re not allowed to say this” and moves into totalitarian territory once there are demands for people saying verboten things to lose their jobs or even face criminal prosecution.
Freedom of speech is not a notion, it's a fundamental right. It's agreed that one cannot use freedom of speech to directly incite violence (although it happens frequently and is rarely prosecuted) . But otherwise one has to put up with it since it is likely in a free society that some will have views directly opposed to one's own. Even if 'one's own' is the government, or someone with a skin thinner than tissue paper.
If you suppress speech then dissenters will find other ways to express themselves which will be even less pleasant for one's own precious views.
Post-menopausal women are past child bearing (without external aid), no doubt what he meant to imply was that the economy was (in his opinion) passing out of a productive phase. It's exactly the sort of thing an economist would say, since for most of them money and people are pretty much indistinguishable.
Shall I come round and do your washing up, as well? Go look at the thread in question, and you'll see examples of me replying to posts I've found particularly objectionable. I'll warn you now it won't be an exhaustive collection: there will be plenty of others on that thread that I didn't have the time or energy to pick up on.
Yes. Limits on free speech should extend no further than:
Direct incitement to physical violence
Targeted harassment of an individual
Slander / defamation of an individual
Shouting fire in a crowded theatre or the modern day equivalent
Otherwise, pretty much anything goes.
But do you think people shouldn’t be allowed to express these things you find objectionable?
I think he means they should, but not without the consequence of potentially being called a bigot or some subclass of the term.
True. That is a phrase which has entered popular usage. Maybe because leprosy has ceased to be so prevalent.
Sound like me on the night of the full moon when I see a farmer.
So this manopause is gonna happen to you too jimv1
Separate names with a comma.