You'll love here in Canada, you'll have no trouble fitting in with the locals.

Well, as I have no intention of being a CEO of any company in the entertainment industry then I'm not too bothered about it. I rarely follow top 100 lists of CEOs anywhere or for anything as it is of no interest to me. Which means your example has no impact on me or my decision to move to Canada.

The other week while i was eating my lunch on the couch, i was watching a music video being filmed on a boat in the crisp sunshine. The man lip sync rapping was flanked by a group of bikini clad women freezing their tits off while he wore a nice big hoodie and some very droopy pants.

They were the only women onboard that i noticed. I'm not surprised though.

Strangely enough, none of my friends in Canada are British Expats (apart from one or two who moved to Canada at the age of 2 and have no memory of their first two years in UK 50 years ago).

In other words, you are absolutely correct.

I left school at 16 in 1987. I don't know whether the 11+ was still in operation then but I didn't take it. I have to admit that I don't know what a secondary modern is or whether one only went to a grammar school if one's parents paid a fee. I went to my local school.

To be honest, I really don't care. I am definately not posh, nor would I want to be. I am not working class, middle class, upper class or any hyphenated combination of any of the above. At no point during my time as a carpenter, prison officer, soldier or lawyer have I ever felt above or below those I worked or socialized with, anywhere in the world.

I never experienced any form of "class system" in the UK but then I don't look at life through a victim's lens. I blame myself when I don't achieve that which I want to. I didn't care what size of house I had in England, nor do I concern myself with the size of my house in Calgary.

It appears to me that there are more than a few Pringle wearing drivers of Volvos on this forum. Stop naval gazing and live your life. Don't worry about what others are doing.

Nonetheless, it's a indication of gender bias in Canadian remuneration practises. In my estimation, part of the "back to fifties" aspect of Canada that appeals to many posters, the streets safe for children thing, is the prevalent view that women should be barefoot and pregnant. Very few industries offer women a reasonably level playing field and those tend to be traditional female jobs such as nursing and teaching. I very much doubt that there actually are female CEOs of entertainment companies though I suppose the business names "Filmores", "House of Lancaster" do tend to be gender neutral so there might be a Ms. Filmore behind the brand.

I'm not sure what case you have, or what position you are trying to put forward, to be honest. But you are giving it a good go!

In your earlier post, you inferred that you are ignored and not taken seriously due to your gender. You appear to believe that this will not be the case in Canada. As someone who lives in Canada, I have asserted that these attitudes exist here, just as they exist everywhere.

Now, you don't need to whittle things down to your exact job to accept that, in wider Canadian society, gender discrimination exists. Also, travelling and visting places is not the same as living there and working there. Other people have covered the point that wild generallisations about "Europe" (really...all of it?) do nothing to add credibility to your discussion.

You come across as feeling quite strongly about this matter as evidenced below, and quite rightly so, but living in Canada is not like living in some sort of gender equal bubble, it just isn't. It may be better in your chosen job, or it may not, but I assume that you will interact with people outside of work.

90% of this forum? I'll guess at them being British but I neither know nor particularly care. These are people who live in Canada, that was the point. How do you imagine that, on a global gender discrimination scale, the UK compares to, for example, UAE? Then consider the demographics of Toronto.

After the 1944 Education Act the UK which effectively introduced secondary education to the masses, the state/public system was divided into different types of schools; Grammar, Technical and Modern. And as noted above there was meant to a parity of status between the three types. Of course that was complete bollox which then necessitated the introduction of the comprehensive system under the Labour government of Wilson. Depending where you lived in the UK you might have gone to one of them.

I went to a Comprehensive, Guv'nor <tugs forelock>. But then I'm a product of a working class boy made good, married to a middle class girl. I feel neither opressed by, nor concious of my class. Which is perhaps the most middle class trait that I exhibit.

That's weird.

From what little I know, one of the problems here is that there just aren't enough women interested in being directors/screenwriters. The OH used to be involved in a film competition here but they found it a struggle to get women to participate in anywhere close to teh numbers the men did as directors. Producers - yes. Other kinds of film jobs (set dec, actors etc) yes. But for whatever reason, there are a lot less women directors/screenwriters, so the pool of talent is much smaller to begin with. It's something the industry is aware of but I don't know what the answer is. I tried screenwriting for a while and haaaated it.

Having said that, there are women doing very well in this business in BC at senior levels...however as I said before they tend to be on the production/business side. Maybe TO is different, I dunno.

My teenage nephew has a few of those dvd's stashed under his bed

The denial of class as an explanatory variable is often propagated by those who benefited the most from it.

It's the social conditions rather than class itself that sabotaged the intelligence and educational choices of countless working class children.

I'm not so far off that. I sat the 11+ and failed it and so went to the local secondary school, although it did change into a comprehensive a few years later. I left school with CSE's and one or two 'O' levels (that the so-called "brainy" kids had to stay after school to study). I remember that kids in the year after me did a 16+ exams which were the pre-cursor to GCSE's.

Spot on. That's what I already do (recently slipped in to from the music industry) I am and want to study. I don't have 20 years to spend fighting my way in to the industry on a full time basis so I have opted to study it. And as a lot of hollywood productions go to Canada then, again - my opinion, the people who know how to do the job properly would be in Canada. I have actually looked at schools here but they can't hold a candle to what I can learn in Canada.

I could consider going in to directing but I'm a realist and I don't think breaking in to that scene at the age of 46 is plausible. I do think my years in touring, problem solving, production assistant can be of use and are transferable skills. I still want an education though.

The year I went to secondary school was the first year they had comprehensive intake. The school I was sent to was a former grammar school and all the years above us were selected entry. It was made abundantly clear that we were not the quality of children the staff hoped or expected to teach.

That said, this was also the first year of co-ed intake. I think some of the staff who taught the more creative subjects were secretly welcoming the introduction of some rough.