Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.


No one is denying that men should be severely punished if they rape, force themselves on women, or pay staff for sex.

However citing anecdotes, and then concluding this is evidence of harassment culture is absurd. Such skewed logic would not be tolerated on any other topic. For example:

anecdotes or evidence of women who make false rape claims does not mean there is a culture of false rape claims by women;

anecdotes or evidence of women tricking men into getting them pregnant does not mean there is a culture of women tricking men into fathering children;

anecdotes of women who marry men just for money does not mean that there is a culture of women marrying men for money.

And so on …

Some people behave appallingly and they need to be punished. Remove them from the profession. But don’t destroy 65-year-old Bob who innocently uses phrases like “good girl” or “my dear” because someone thinks they’ve been victimised by a toxic male. At most such language should be a minor irritation to a strong confident lawyer.

The Gazette article clearly despises judging women based on their appearance, but then goes on to attack women in marketing based on their pretty appearance. They are also attacked owing to their age. And even their personalities come under attack for being “bubbly”. How sexist and patronising.

Quite clearly the person providing this anecdote has a real axe to grind with younger prettier females. Did they not consider that these women might actually be really good at their jobs, and that is why they were employed? No, their personalities were attacked. Did they not consider that women who work in marketing might pay particular attention to their appearance because they work in marketing and therefore know it is important to create a good impression? No, they were judged on how they look. Did they not consider that these comments reeked of bitterness towards young female staff? No. Did they not consider that “marketing girls” is no more offensive than calling the England football squad “our boys”?

The real toxic culture I have encountered in firms has been older women bullying younger women – just like the person with the axe to grind against marketing departments. I helped sort out a grievance in one such instance. The firm had a long-running culture involving cliques of older women bullying young female staff over their appearance, age and personalities. They bullied any younger female members of staff who they considered too slim, too made up, too girly.

So how in an article about sexism is it fine to openly mock women who work in marketing based on their appearance, age, and personalities?

Your details