Period Dignity Officer post scrapped!

As for all the "indignities" perhaps having a man discussing things would have opened up the subject for other men and boys and taken away the secrecy and stigma still associated with menstruation, which would do a great deal to remove the indignities. It's a question of having an open mind and not prejudging because of someone's sex.

Why the "" around indignities? The role was a period dignity officer. My mind is not closed. I am very much open to the possibility that a woman could do the job better than a man - are you?

Maybe, perhaps, possibly, it might have happened that having a bloke in the role would educate boys about periods better than a woman who has experienced them, but is that a good reason not to give the woman a chance to show what she could do after starting up the project? Is an untried man always better than a woman in your opinion?

Anyway, let's see the result of the tribunal when more of the facts are made public?

I thought 'lived experience' was the mantra so often espoused by various vested interests? How can any male have the 'lived experience' of a first period, an unexpected flooding leading to a skirt/trousers soaked in menstrual blood, or indeed the cramps and pain of a normal/extraordinary menstrual cycle? Yes of course male (how exactly is this being defined?) understanding of female menstruation and its possible limitations/side effects is to be welcomed, but no man can come close to any 'lived experience' of menstruation.

I agree Rosie, but the idea that anything should be considered ’female’ is anathema to some. We really have nothing left any more.

Doodledog

I agree Rosie, but the idea that anything should be considered ’female’ is anathema to some. We really have nothing left any more.

Wee bit of an over-reaction there maybe?

Doodledog

*As for all the "indignities" perhaps having a man discussing things would have opened up the subject for other men and boys and taken away the secrecy and stigma still associated with menstruation, which would do a great deal to remove the indignities. It's a question of having an open mind and not prejudging because of someone's sex.*

Why the "" around indignities? The role was a period dignity officer. My mind is not closed. I am very much open to the possibility that a woman could do the job better than a man - are you?

Maybe, perhaps, possibly, it might have happened that having a bloke in the role would educate boys about periods better than a woman who has experienced them, but is that a good reason not to give the woman a chance to show what she could do after starting up the project? Is an untried man always better than a woman in your opinion?

Anyway, let's see the result of the tribunal when more of the facts are made public?

The inverted commas were because it was a direct quote from your post Doodledog as I'm not certain what you meant by the term I used them.
The post was a Period Dignity Officer. I think the dignity probably applied more to the poverty and how that impacts on women, than to the physical aspects of menstruation, but you are free to dispute that.
As I said before the project was not started by the woman as she claims. This was new money brought in because of new legislation and it aimed to do more than go into schools and teach girls to make reusable sanitary products. The job she was doing was undoubtedly valuable, but you have claimed that this job was primarily PR and that certainly isn't what she was doing. In fact there is no evidence that she had any experience in that field.