What is sexist remark?

I am confused, whether it is about harshness of law against rapists or sexist remark? Both are wrong in my view. Why a strict law should not be in place for rapist in the first place and why should companies be afraid for offering the job if that is not a detering factor for women?

I am confused, whether it is about harshness of law against rapists or sexist remark? Both are wrong in my view. Why a strict law should not be in place for rapist in the first place and why should companies be afraid for offering the job if that is not a detering factor for women?

He is trying to convey, due to harsher laws, bosses would like to appoint male peers instead of females in order to stay out of controversy. But, he said this on the back drop of Tejpal never ending saga and also his statement, could point out that females are appointed by bosses for ..... one should always be careful while speaking, especially when in public sphere.

I am confused, whether it is about harshness of law against rapists or sexist remark? Both are wrong in my view. Why a strict law should not be in place for rapist in the first place and why should companies be afraid for offering the job if that is not a detering factor for women?

Rape is a serious matter. But even a small joke may be considered some times as sexual offence. Women can take undue advantage of this. So, it is unsafe for any employee to be any time alone with a woman. Who knows when some allegation may be made. I remember that once a woman employee made some allegation of harassment against her officer. I was also in that office. In fact, the officer had just warned her about her indifference to work and not being punctual. Then there were no strict law. Now the situation can be worse. This is just the S.P. leader talked about. He apprehends that many firms may play safe by eliminating or reducing the employment of women. you may agree or not but cannot say that the leader's remark is sexist.

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

He said that harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrink employment for females. In his views what are happen with females are right one. He is a nonsense person.

I am confused, whether it is about harshness of law against rapists or sexist remark? Both are wrong in my view. Why a strict law should not be in place for rapist in the first place and why should companies be afraid for offering the job if that is not a detering factor for women?

Rape is a serious matter. But even a small joke may be considered some times as sexual offence. Women can take undue advantage of this. So, it is unsafe for any employee to be any time alone with a woman. Who knows when some allegation may be made. I remember that once a woman employee made some allegation of harassment against her officer. I was also in that office. In fact, the officer had just warned her about her indifference to work and not being punctual. Then there were no strict law. Now the situation can be worse. This is just the S.P. leader talked about. He apprehends that many firms may play safe by eliminating or reducing the employment of women. you may agree or not but cannot say that the leader's remark is sexist.

There is all kind of people in this world and that includes employees. We cannot expect all of them to play 'angels' some think they can achieve newer heights with their innovative ideas then no one an stop them. If companies think this way there is nothing wrong, they are out to run their organisation without having to go into controversies. It's not that all women do this for self gain but you can't overlook the fact both men and women take advantage of their position.

This also teaches to be alert while working, as in one such discussion, it is always better to be in good manner and also remove all weired thoughts while working with lady colleague and peers.

This also teaches to be alert while working, as in one such discussion, it is always better to be in good manner and also remove all weired thoughts while working with lady colleague and peers.

My Sutra is, "Mind your business". Be it in office or on the road.

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

He said that harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrink employment for females. In his views what are happen with females are right one. He is a nonsense person.

Just think rationally and you will get his point. everyone wants to be safe. many concerns employ hundreds of employees or even more. With very strict law, there could be many cases of sexual harassment even on flimsy grounds. Then management would be more occupied with such cases rather than business. It is natural that this would result in shrinkage of employment for women.

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

No it is not sexist remark, Indeed in present sex is not a prohibited word. Meri Tang Bhi Sexy, it is song of Hindi film.

Now Farukh Abdulla Central minister has also remarked that now men fear to talk with their women colleagues. Thus he has endorsed views of the Samajvadi leader Naresh Aggarwal.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/men-are-scared-to-talk-to-women-nowadays-farooq-abdullah/article1-1159652.aspx

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

I think you are not looking at the implications of his comment ...
1, It shows his bent of mind where he thinks that a woman who is able to stand for herself is not preferred in work places
2, He shows his feudal attitude that men have urges beyond control and do have such a capacity to belittle women and treat them as sex objects only !
3, He is a responsible elected leader , probably many women have voted him and such a comment coming from him is a complete let down to them.
4, Lastly, it exposes India's mind set where ,men can never see a woman having the strength to get justice against them when they exploit them.
It is only a very mean and low thinking person that can come up with such an insensitive comment ...

Now, Farooq Abdulah, is making such comment, could not understand what is the motive behind, may be he is trying to find a defense of Tejpal but for what reason, all these weired comments by politicians should stop as this is not showing the culture in a right way.

Now, Farooq Abdulah, is making such comment, could not understand what is the motive behind, may be he is trying to find a defense of Tejpal but for what reason, all these weired comments by politicians should stop as this is not showing the culture in a right way.

Farookh's statement is not connected with Tejpal's case. It was in connection with retired Supreme court judge, A.K Ganguly.

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

I think you are not looking at the implications of his comment ...
1, It shows his bent of mind where he thinks that a woman who is able to stand for herself is not preferred in work places
2, He shows his feudal attitude that men have urges beyond control and do have such a capacity to belittle women and treat them as sex objects only !
3, He is a responsible elected leader , probably many women have voted him and such a comment coming from him is a complete let down to them.
4, Lastly, it exposes India's mind set where ,men can never see a woman having the strength to get justice against them when they exploit them.
It is only a very mean and low thinking person that can come up with such an insensitive comment ...

We just cannot go on commenting witthout understanding what a particular leader really has in mind or implications. It is a fact that every one avoids obstacles that may arise in his organization. There are hundreds of employees in an establishment. Needless to say there is likelihood of some complaints of sexual harassment. The easiest way is to employ as few womern as possible. Thus too strict law on sexual harassment can and will definitely lead to shrinkage of employment for women- whether you like or not. Mere sentimental approach without considering ground reality will lead us nowhere. There are always two sides to a coin and seeing only one side does not give corrrect view. Naresh Aggarwal and Farukh abdulah are able administrators and they know the consequences of very strict legislation on sexual harassment. They may be less sensitive as alleged but the fact remains that their blind critics are very less sensible.

It may be okay to disagree with a comment. But if some one frankly diwscusses certain aspect of law, is he sexist. The Samajvadi minister simply said that the harsh law on sexual harassment can lead to shrinkage of employment opportrunities. The minister may be wrong but how is his remark sexist? If we are so intolerant to free and frank discussion, this is end of freedom of expression and democracy.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/firms-afraid-to-hire-women--says-sp-leader-124426727.html?vp=1

I think you are not looking at the implications of his comment ...
1, It shows his bent of mind where he thinks that a woman who is able to stand for herself is not preferred in work places
2, He shows his feudal attitude that men have urges beyond control and do have such a capacity to belittle women and treat them as sex objects only !
3, He is a responsible elected leader , probably many women have voted him and such a comment coming from him is a complete let down to them.
4, Lastly, it exposes India's mind set where ,men can never see a woman having the strength to get justice against them when they exploit them.
It is only a very mean and low thinking person that can come up with such an insensitive comment ...

We just cannot go on commenting witthout understanding what a particular leader really has in mind or implications. It is a fact that every one avoids obstacles that may arise in his organization. There are hundreds of employees in an establishment. Needless to say there is likelihood of some complaints of sexual harassment. The easiest way is to employ as few womern as possible. Thus too strict law on sexual harassment can and will definitely lead to shrinkage of employment for women- whether you like or not. Mere sentimental approach without considering ground reality will lead us nowhere. There are always two sides to a coin and seeing only one side does not give corrrect view. Naresh Aggarwal and Farukh abdulah are able administrators and they know the consequences of very strict legislation on sexual harassment. They may be less sensitive as alleged but the fact remains that their blind critics are very less sensible.

I totally disagree with that since it shows these leaders in poor light, however able they may be ! They should know when to keep their opinions to themselves on such sensitive issues since they are sending out subtle messages to employers saying not to employ women ! what kind of justice is that and how can anyone even condone such a statement coming from people so hgher up...