That was the most disgusting patronizing response ever. All she said was "I appreciate those of you who are trying to listen" which is hardly a "radical leftist ideology." Half the problem this thread has is people assuming fighting sexism automatically puts you on one side of "the culture wars" and if we keep trying to sidestep the real issue to instead profess our bi-annual November voting preferences we accomplish nothing here.

Dude, turn off the computer, go outside and touch grass.

Going back to the first sentence in this thread, what method could be used by people in railway preservation to put an end to sexism? In searching the topic, the only method seems to be to increase awareness that sexism is not tolerated. Does railway preservation make a sufficient effort to creating the necessary awareness?

Also a factor is that sexism and sexual harassment are two different things. Only the latter is connected to an action. The former can exist without any indication unless it is expressed in some kind of offensive act. So sexism may eventually motivate actual committing of sexual harassment, but sexism can also exist in a person indefinitely without any outward expression. Also, sexual harassment can be perpetrated by a person who is not a sexist, as is often mentioned in relation to sexual harassment being sometimes motivated by attainment of power and control alone.

In any case, if sexism cannot be ended, at least it should be possible to end sexual harassment. We are told to have a conversation and only focus on the general idea. It seems to me that accomplishing this goal will take more than that. You can strengthen awareness, but eventually the strength of awareness may create an uncomfortable atmosphere. Indeed, some of the references do cite the problem of making training seem too accusatory toward those not part of the problem.

It seems to me that if the goal were to put an end to sexual harassment and/or sexism, business organizations would employ professional training programs. Many of these are described online in their promotional material. I suspect cost would be significant, but how can such an effective tool be ignored when the goal is so challenging?

As long as everybody is an individual there will be as many definitions of what's sexism or harassment as there are individuals. Understanding and consideration of intent from all sides is much ore necessary than trying to use a lot of words to define what's essentially a matter of perception. Not limiting options for anybody based on any criteria that's not measurable and appropriate (can you reach this far, can you lift this amount of mass, etc when the job demands it) is obvious and not related to gender, however you want to define it or whatever combination of pronouns you want to involve. I'm more concerned with whether any person's aptitude for a task and desire to be proficient is going to lead to success than any of that other silly stuff....... especially in a shrinking pool of potential applicants for low paid if at all historic preservation work. That and finding a sorting device to weed out asshats......

Please explain how this topic is "far left", "radical", or "authoritarian".

I never said it was, Ed, but always be aware of those claiming they're fighting sexism, racism, etc. and instead are really attempting to further a greater agenda which will end up benefiting none of us or the rail preservation community as a whole.

And Travis, I'm willing to bet I know far more about grass than you do so try again. LOL

Sigh. There is no hidden agenda.

To the subject at hand… Try to imagine if you were a member of the opposite sex and see if you like the treatment i.e. roadblocks and getting pigeon-holed based only on your sex, race, orientation, whatever. You won’t like it. Good thing you don’t know my wife - she’d verbally hand you your posterior in less than 30 seconds.

You literally did just a few posts ago. Or at least inferred it.

Not sure what conspiracy media you’re watching, but I recommend laying off the dark corners of YouTube. I’m an activist for equality of all sorts, especially against sexism. There is no “hidden agenda”, are you implying that women’s equality is a ploy to ruin a community?

Clearly you don’t know much about grass, figuring all you do is type responses to a forum that you could ignore instead of insulting posters and acting overall childish. This forum talks about a podcast that covered a sensitive topic very well (in my and many others opinions). I’m not sure why you had to lash out at a person responding to the topic by calling their supportive thoughts apart of the “radical left agenda”.

On another note, let me get this straight. The forum admins banned a guy for being annoying with restoring steam locomotives (he was causing some issues), yet are letting some of the people on this poll insult each other without consequence? Please, someone lock this topic or maybe keep a more stern eye on what is being said.

Could you please provide some evidence of this? What makes this ongoing and systemic? None of my male and female colleagues at a handful (9) of prominent railroad museums agree that this issue is ongoing nor systemic. Does your interview data reflect realtime cases from the past few years or are these experiences from 15-30 years ago? In furthering equality, our population has made great strides in sex/gender equality over the past decades.

I agree. This thread had the potential to be a fair conversation but quickly turned into nothing more than something you'd see on certain social media outlets. Reading comments by one specific individual referring to the OP as "little Nick" was especially disappointing. In my opinion, political mudslinging and conspiracies have no place on a forum like RYPN.

I know my post doesn't necessarily add any substance, but I just wanted to add my two cents in. I'll still keep an eye on this thread in hopes that it continues to get back on topic. We can all possibly learn something from it, and a few members have even made some very solid points so far.

Typically in such accusatory discussions about "systemic" social problems, the abject failure of the selected target (in this case, your example museums/operations) to immediately recognize, acknowledge, and accept the issues supposedly "at hand" is cited as evidence of the "systemic nature" of the (alleged) problem.
Remember: You can't "prove a negative."

But the most specious of "evidence" is supposed to be unquestioningly accepted, lest your denials be construed as further "proof" of your "systemic culpability."
Therefore, "you can't win."

And that's BY EXPLICIT DESIGN.

"Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no????"

Every time one of these threads pops up there's a goddam storm of insults for anyone who even suggests that there could possibly be an issue with sexism in the community. There's no listening nor hearing out, just constant insults, invoking cancel culture slash radical far leftism, etc.

One could even argue that the denialism proves it's a bigger problem than people say it is.

What agenda would that be?

Are you implying that Nick is on the payroll of some "nefarious cabal"?

What exactly are you trying to say?

Because I'm picking up your dog whistles, and I've gotta say, they're not going to help ensure that people in 2050 care about historic trains.

Good evening folks, ...

So, we are now up to five pages of discussion in this thread. I do believe that the intention of the original poster was to bring awareness about a podcast that he thought was relevant to the rail preservation movement. I'm not opposed to seeing a conversation about the topic of sexism being discussed here. However, I am a bit mad that the topic was presented in such a broad and unfocused manner.

In some of the responses so far, and even in the questioning used by the podcaster, two similar, but still different topics have sort of been lumped together - sexism and sexual harassment. The former topic should produce a frank discussion with diverse opinions. The latter topic should produce a relatively uniform response among the vast majority of decent people. Any credible accusation, supported by evidence of the latter, should trigger a universal condemnation of those person(s) who would engage in that activity.

I think one of the reasons this thread is struggling to find the right "tone" is the result of inadvertent combination of the two topics into one thread. While there will always remain differences of opinion with regards to sexism, I'm pretty sure on the issue of sexual harassment there will be overwhelming consensus between many people from different walks of life that harassment is is wrong, and those who perpetrate it need to be held to account for doing so.

My recommendation is that future commenters might want to clarify if they are addressing sexism, or sexual harassment, in their comments. I think it would cut down on the "political nature" this thread is now taking on....

Just my two cents ... I now return you to your regularly scheduled tirades ....

Well, that was fun. LOL

Not trying to be condescending or anything, this is just to ensure you guys know exactly what the heck we're talking about here...

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... -of-sexism

Sexual harassment is a form of malevolent, or as the author labels it, "hostile" sexism.

Scroll down the page a bit further for a look at "toxic masculinity".