Task 2. Sex Discrimination.
Changes are very gradual, they are too slow.
I mean if you sit under a tree long enough, the apple will fall off and you can eat it, but sometimes you've got to stand up and do something.
You've got to, um, I think the law is there to protect people.
Because women were being discriminated against, it was necessary for the law to stop that, um at least to some extent.
But you can't change the way people think.
I mean, people's discrimination is based on the fact, a lot of it.
They don't think women are capable of making decisions or have any intelligence at all.
I mean a lot of people believe that, and if that provided, once that's proved wrong, that removes the valid grounds for the discrimination and you know, you, the belief is then unjustified.
You've got to stamp it out.
I mean, it's as simple as that.
But just in the same way, that if I want to become a manager director,
I have to look at the company which I work and prove certain elements of my behaviour or...or my skills to these people, so must women.
Yes, but if they're not given the chance, then how can they?
I mean it's very sad that the law has to be there at all.
I mean that you have to say to somebody who's employing someone, you must give, you must interview men and women, it seems a great shame, you have to tell people to do that.
It's also great shame you have to tell people not to go around murdering other people.
I mean, that law's there because people do stupid things.
As I say, the law is, is not that you have to sort of,
I mean you basically all you have to do is give women the right to apply and the right to be considered in the same way as everybody else and if the law was effective as it should be, there'd be nothing wrong with that.
I mean, what's wrong with giving women the chance to apply for a job and giving them the right to be considered on equal terms with men.
Women could alway, women could always apply.
That's not true, though.
I mean there are employers who just would not consider them.
A women would not apply if the job was, if the job advertisement was couched in such term.
I mean, the leading example.
I mean the whole point about the...an advertisement asking for a draughtsman being against the terms of act, is that it gives the imp, it's implied that only men will be considered, and that's why that would be a legal advertisement if you put at the bottom, um, applications from men and women will be considered, the same with postmen and all the other jobs. (Interesting point)
How important is the language, Jan, do you think?
I... it's symbolic.
Um, I personally don't find it particularly important.
Er, if you have a meeting and you call the man or the women who chairs the meeting the chairman, it just doesn't matter, I don't think at all.