There is a controversy in the United Kingdom where Alexander Carter-Silk, 57, the head of Brown Rudnick’s intellectual property group in Europe, has been accused from scores of critics of being a sexist, misogynistic monster. His offense? Carter-Silk had received a LinkedIn contact for Charlotte Proudman, 27. He responded by writing that he thought her photo was “stunning.” That led Proudman, a human-rights lawyer, to denounce his “unacceptable and misogynistic behavior” for complimenting the picture.
Carer-Silk wrote: “Charlotte, delighted to connect. I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but that is a stunning picture !!! You definitely win the prize for the best LinkedIn picture I have ever seen. Always interested to understand people’s skills and how we might work together.”
Proudman was outraged and responded that it was indeed horrendous: “I find your message offensive. I am on LinkedIn for business purposes, not to be approached about my physical appearance or to be objectified by sexist men. The eroticization of women’s physical appearance is a way of exercising power over women. It silences women’s professional attributes as their physical appearance becomes the subject. Unacceptable and misogynistic behavior. Think twice before sending another woman (half your age) such a sexist message.”
Carter-Silk said that he was actually not commenting on any sexual allure but “professional quality of the presentation on LinkedIn, which was unfortunately misinterpreted.” He explained that “Most people post pretty unprofessional pictures on LinkedIn.” From Proudman’s perspective, the reference to her appearance was both transparent and demeaning.
The controversy reflects growing conflicts over compliments in the workplace that are perceived dramatically differently. Critics raise the question of whether Carter-Silk would have commented on the appearance of a man in a similar photo. The photo after all is not particularly remarkable. Yet, Carter-Silk insists that he was only commenting on a striking image and not conveying any sexist attitude. Even if one was not inclined to accept his explanation, is complimenting a photo as “stunning” prima facie evidence of sexism?
What do you think?
She used Linkedin to get her 15 minutes. Her stance is pathetic. I still hold doors open for women, and men, if they are close behind me…it is a simple courtesy. Has nothing to do with handsome or pretty. I still say occasionally that a woman looks nice, when I mean done up well and in good taste. Guess I’m a misogynist. I might also tell a man he’s well done if professionally attired….raggedy torn jeans and a tee shirt with a belly sticking out, perhaps not so much. She does have a professionally done photo and now tries to suggest it wasn’t meant to be attractive in the sense of pulchritude. Oh, please. This is among the several reasons I’ve not bothered with Linkedin, too many people are there for social or political reasons, not professional reasons…although I am a signed on member due to a relationship with a bloke in England who has a successful business. We’ve agreed to use email rather than Linkedin for conversation about his or my work…or anything else for that matter.
PS: this stuff is a reason I’ve avoided comment on the “looks” of Ms Kim Davis…it has nothing to do with my opinion of her or her position on her duties. I ain’t so purdy anymore either 😀
I don’t know. Being in the business where photography is very important, I immediately thought to myself how spectacular the lighting was in this photo. Dramatic shadows, but the highlight detail is held together. Very nice from a technical standpoint. Then I read the blog headline. I probably would have commented on that as well. I will make a point to keep such observations to myself going forward.
Geeeeez….
Soooo….she puts up the most attractive photo of herself that she can find on her profile. A photo obviously taken by a professional and not one taken by a selfie stick with her making a duck lip face.
Then when someone remarks on the niceness of her photo she gets all butt hurt? She wants it both ways. “Look at me in my really nice photo….HOW DARE you notice that I look nice!!!!!”
Maybe she should have gone with the duck face photo with some spinach in her front teeth instead.
It would seem that he has more of an argument to sue her stunning a** off. This is a graphic example of hypocrisy. Women present themselves as stunning, not for the mirror but for others. If a woman shows her cleavage and a man smiles, it is as it should be. The woman got what she wanted, to be ogled. The only problem is that it might not be the right guy, so he is ‘all of the above’.
People are, to a large degree at certain times in their lives, peacocks. He was probably cloaking his drool in his remark but she was not cloaking her allure in her presentation.
Meh. She outed herself as a petty child, not a pro.
I have seen a lot of women showing cleavage on LinkedIn. Obviously they want the attention. One that is in my network is actually the highest rated for hits, and she has a side shot of herself in a pencil skirt with the bust uplifted in a decidedly erotic pose. I hope she doesn’t have a snotty attitude like this prim little petunia.
Shame on that lawyer for thinking that he isn’t bound by the same phony political correctness that the BigLaw has helped ram down the throats of the rest of the population. Sauce for the goose! I have no sympathy for BigLaw capos who get their metaphorical tits in the wringer.
These “whiners” are everywhere. Why can’t they just take a compliment?
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-sergeant-busted-throwing-semen-co-worker-police-article-1.2353936
JAG w/ a classic rant! We have some great women commenters here. When I got here they were almost all pretty lame. We need more black and brown folk.
Message to all Professors at local college: Do not tell anyone they “look nice”. Apparently it’s OK to tell others they look like crap.
The knock-on effect is to silence anyone else from doing BadThink ever again.
Of course, since the rules change, and even the words change every day, you CANNOT WIN.
You literally cannot avoid giving offence.
Ha ha ha.
That’s why I advise avoiding Vox Day.
His work is gumming things up.
Those were not the briefs she was looking for.
Er….
Never mind.
Anyway, she will be elevated among SJWs and we will find her more work Pointing and Shrieking.
Carter-Silk should have responded with the only known successful response to an SJW attack:
BTW, that is a professional photo shot. She paid good money for that. The photographer was supposed to make her look good. Personally, she does not rise to stunning as far as I am concerned, but taste is personal.
Chief Concort – since she is no longer being instructed (in the UK that means getting any legal trial work) from Legal Aide, I think the winner is Carter-Silk.
Inga, the use of “hysteria” is misogynistic patriarchal BadThink, referring as it does to the uterus.
Ms. Proudman, like a good foot-soldier, is merely following The eight steps of SJW Attack:
Proudman did the Point-and-Shriek, and the internet does the rest.
She has won (Yay!) because Carter-Silk already issued a short statement admitting that he “apologised for the offence caused”.
Now for VICTROY Parade!
Her professional and non-“stunning” lookIng photo can be found on Match.com.
Annie: It is early. I woke up and decided to troll the Turleyblog. I get down to your comment and there is one of those photos of that fat hog clerk. I puked. I would photograph it and share it with you but the blog says that such a thing would be un civil. Well, that photo is un civil. Not civil. Civilly incorrect.
Now with regard to the bitchin human who calls some guy a “misogynist”. What the heck is such a creature? Is it like that virus in one of the articles above?
Annie @1:31am
Lol! Some women can only pray that someone will accuse them of being stunning.
I bet she is constantly exhausted by the effort needed to find offense in everything.
I’m STUNNED at all the STUNNING comments. Darren, you nailed it.