Author Topic: Why do so few men "follow/fanboy/support" women, when the reverse is not true?  (Read 18496 times)

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
use2betrix, your comments and the study you linked don't show causation. So you haven't provided evidence for this comment:

itís a scientific fact that testosterone and estrogen have major impacts on personality traits.

Given that lack of evidence, I see no reason to address anything else you wrote above. I have nothing further to add on this topic, beyond what I've already said.

You mentioned that men, as a class, have expectations to be aggressive. My point is that itís not just these cultural expectations, itís biological differences.

The link I provided had a study where testosterone levels were measured in violent inmates vs non-violent inmates, and the violent inmates had higher testosterone levels nearly 90%? of the time.

These are just some differences in the ranges of menís levels, and aggression doesnít always mean violence. The lowest average menís testosterone levels are around 3x less than the highest levels. The lowest menís is still around 5x higher than the highest females levels..

Thereís a ton more articles on the topic, I just chose a more scientific article. I can tell by your unwillingness to really provide any additional feedback, that you really donít want to consider the option as it doesnít fit the feminist agenda that aside from genitals, thereís no difference in genders.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12357
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
@Cressida - out of curiosity, what impact do you think the massive hormonal differences play on gender roles and expectations in our society?

For example, men are often viewed as more aggressive. Testosterone is directly tied to aggression, and men have around 10x as much testosterone as women do. In your thoughts, it seems that you expect someday to have virtually *no differences* between men and women. Unless there is somehow biological changes, how can these hormones which control personality traits, seemingly balance out between genders?

With your expectations of there someday being no difference in personality traits, you would have to believe that hormones have no impact on these personality traits.

Sounds like this is your argument:
1. Men have more testosterone than women.
2. Men exhibit more aggressive behavior than women.
3. Therefore, aggression must be a result of testosterone and there's no point in trying to roll back the pervasive gendered expectations that men will be aggressive.

I don't think that's a sound argument.

I doubt hormones have *zero* impact on personality. But men as individuals have varying amounts of testosterone production, whereas all men as a class have been subjected to gendered expectations that they will be aggressive. Let's get rid of the gendered expectations first, and then see if men are still hopelessly aggressive. Then we can talk about truly inherent personality differences.

Iím not saying that this is the entire causation of differences amongst genders, itís a scientific fact that testosterone and estrogen have major impacts on personality traits.

Womenís testosterone averages around 15-70 ng/DL, while menís is around 350-1100 ng/DL. Yes, there are variations among men, but those ranges are for healthy average adults. So in healthy adults, men have around 5x-70x more..

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693622/

Iím sorry but no matter how much some people have this dream of being 100% identical in personality traits, unless anatomy changes, itís not going to happen.

Note - Iím not saying that more testosterone is better by any means. Yes, the higher muscle mass can be beneficial in some aspects, although itís often at the cost of flexibility, small motor skills, etc. In ďsomeĒ cases, aggression and drive can be beneficial, although in many cases it can be a hinderence. It also gets a LOT of men in trouble, in addition to the added on issues of the cultural expectations.

Iím in no way disagreeing with many of the cultural issues driving a wedge between genders, however I think instead of having this expectation that women and men will be 100% equal in their thinking some day, I think it would be more realistic to find the equal values that each gender can can contribute to all aspects of society, although of course any gender is able to contribute however they choose. I honestly feel like the hormonal differences (with the added society pressures) do contribute to women typically having better empathy and being better caretakers in terms of nurses, etc. obviously this is just a generalization.

Men on average have more testosterone, and women more estrogen.  That's completely true and easily measurable.  The evidence regarding the impact of this hormonal difference on how men and women think is however not very clear cut or well understood at the moment.  Current research seems to indicate that is is a factor, but not the most important related to sexual differentiation, cognition, and emotion.

Quote
In the twentieth century, the dominant model of sexual differentiation stated that genetic sex (XX versus XY) causes differentiation of the gonads, which then secrete gonadal hormones that act directly on tissues to induce sex differences in function. This serial model of sexual differentiation was simple, unifying and seductive. Recent evidence, however, indicates that the linear model is incorrect and that sex differences arise in response to diverse sex-specific signals originating from inherent differences in the genome and involve cellular mechanisms that are specific to individual tissues or brain regions. Moreover, sex-specific effects of the environment reciprocally affect biology, sometimes profoundly, and must therefore be integrated into a realistic model of sexual differentiation. A more appropriate model is a parallel-interactive model that encompasses the roles of multiple molecular signals and pathways that differentiate males and females, including synergistic and compensatory interactions among pathways and an important role for the environment.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3165173/

Quote
Testosterone influences the brain via organizational and activational effects. Numerous relevant studies on rodents and a few on humans focusing on specific behavioral and cognitive parameters have been published. The results are, unfortunately, controversial and puzzling. Dosing, timing, even the application route seem to considerably affect the outcomes.

Quote
cultural differences, sex and age have all been shown to impact the physiological effects of testosterone
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330791/

Quote
The study of sex/gender differences attracts the attention of a considerable amount of research in addition to the public media, politicians, and laypersons. Many use neuroscientific sex/gender differences to explain and partly justify social and behavioral differences. However, the research of the past 50 years and particularly of the last 10 years has shown that sex/gender differences in terms of cognitive functions are less clear than previously assumed. Both sexes are more similar in respect to many psychological functions, and it is also now clear how strong the influence of culture and social stereotypes is. In addition, the sex/gender differences in brain anatomy and brain function are less clear. There are some relatively strong but also many moderate or even weak sex/gender differences in terms of brain anatomy and brain function. These differences are not large enough to support a clear sexual dimorphism. Thus, there is no strong evidence available supporting the existence of a typical ďfemaleĒ or ďmaleĒ brain.

Most interestingly, there is currently a lack of a direct and strong correlation between these neuroscientific findings and real-life behavior as well as cognition. However, in the context of modern plasticity research, we must take considerably more account of the fact that the brain can adapt and change anatomically and functionally through practice and learning. Therefore, it could be possible that male and female brains might change their structure and functions because of their different experiences and because they are exposed to different social environments. Thus, the brainís anatomical and functional sex/gender differences found so far can also be modulated by experience and not entirely by sex-related genetic influences. However, it is also possible that genetic, hormonal, and social influences interact in a currently unknown manner in forming brain and behavior. In light of these influences on the development of the human brain, a new area of sex/gender research could be established. We should consider the human brain more as a particularly adaptable organ that allows us to adjust to different environments and cultures.]The study of sex/gender differences attracts the attention of a considerable amount of research in addition to the public media, politicians, and laypersons. Many use neuroscientific sex/gender differences to explain and partly justify social and behavioral differences. However, the research of the past 50 years and particularly of the last 10 years has shown that sex/gender differences in terms of cognitive functions are less clear than previously assumed. Both sexes are more similar in respect to many psychological functions, and it is also now clear how strong the influence of culture and social stereotypes is. In addition, the sex/gender differences in brain anatomy and brain function are less clear. There are some relatively strong but also many moderate or even weak sex/gender differences in terms of brain anatomy and brain function. These differences are not large enough to support a clear sexual dimorphism. Thus, there is no strong evidence available supporting the existence of a typical ďfemaleĒ or ďmaleĒ brain.

Most interestingly, there is currently a lack of a direct and strong correlation between these neuroscientific findings and real-life behavior as well as cognition. However, in the context of modern plasticity research, we must take considerably more account of the fact that the brain can adapt and change anatomically and functionally through practice and learning. Therefore, it could be possible that male and female brains might change their structure and functions because of their different experiences and because they are exposed to different social environments. Thus, the brainís anatomical and functional sex/gender differences found so far can also be modulated by experience and not entirely by sex-related genetic influences. However, it is also possible that genetic, hormonal, and social influences interact in a currently unknown manner in forming brain and behavior. In light of these influences on the development of the human brain, a new area of sex/gender research could be established. We should consider the human brain more as a particularly adaptable organ that allows us to adjust to different environments and cultures.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6013760/

OtherJen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 894
  • Location: Metro Detroit
I have problems though when anyone wants to play the "society is bad" game. My take is that people with victim syndrome should focus on themselves and see if they belief systems really impact their lives in any way shape or form. I think 99% of the time people that make these types of claims aren't being honest with themselves in that all their grand theories don't actually impact them at all apart from in their own head.

I think women and men both play the society is bad victim card and I find it really tough to listen too. Men think they are discriminated against (which is true but also not true) and women think the same thing (which is true but also not true). I think all people should just suck it up and focus on improving their lives.

Huh. I'm not a rabid SJW but this strikes me as pretty flipping complacent. Structural oppression and marginalization is a thing; it's not a grand theory and it's not in people's heads. Telling people to live with it seems defeatist. The status quo isn't always the best we can hope for.

I could say more but I'll leave it there.

I think it is all in people's heads or maybe better put they go looking for problems outside of themselves rather than looking at themselves. Are women given a fair go in society today ? Of course they are. Sure some people cop it but both sexes cop it. On the whole though we are living in a world that gives you so many opportunities. Focusing on on structural oppression and marginalization to me comes across as delusional. It's like focusing on the hole in the donut.

Is it okay for men to complain about how the laws are against them ? I work for a big company and women and minorities are definitely promoted as a priority. That means that capable deserving men will not be promoted sometimes. That is discrimination. I think it's crazy for men to complain about this because the modern world provides so many opportunities to all people today.

Iím curious about the assumption that the women and minorities who are promoted are less capable than their white male coworkers. For most of Western history, white men received such promotions by default, and equally or more qualified women and minorities were not even considered. One could thus view corporate efforts to ensure the consideration of ALL qualified candidates as a means of correcting earlier bias.

For any given position, only one person will be selected. It seems ridiculous to assume that the white man would always be the best person for the job, but again, that was most of Western history.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6074
I have problems though when anyone wants to play the "society is bad" game. My take is that people with victim syndrome should focus on themselves and see if they belief systems really impact their lives in any way shape or form. I think 99% of the time people that make these types of claims aren't being honest with themselves in that all their grand theories don't actually impact them at all apart from in their own head.

I think women and men both play the society is bad victim card and I find it really tough to listen too. Men think they are discriminated against (which is true but also not true) and women think the same thing (which is true but also not true). I think all people should just suck it up and focus on improving their lives.

Huh. I'm not a rabid SJW but this strikes me as pretty flipping complacent. Structural oppression and marginalization is a thing; it's not a grand theory and it's not in people's heads. Telling people to live with it seems defeatist. The status quo isn't always the best we can hope for.

I could say more but I'll leave it there.

I think it is all in people's heads or maybe better put they go looking for problems outside of themselves rather than looking at themselves. Are women given a fair go in society today ? Of course they are. Sure some people cop it but both sexes cop it. On the whole though we are living in a world that gives you so many opportunities. Focusing on on structural oppression and marginalization to me comes across as delusional. It's like focusing on the hole in the donut.

Is it okay for men to complain about how the laws are against them ? I work for a big company and women and minorities are definitely promoted as a priority. That means that capable deserving men will not be promoted sometimes. That is discrimination. I think it's crazy for men to complain about this because the modern world provides so many opportunities to all people today.

OMG let me roll my eyes so hard.

Focusing on structural oppression and marginalization is the only way to dismantle it.  Ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist?  Please.

Nick_Miller

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
Focusing on concerts for a minute...consider Maroon 5, Justin Timberlake, Mumford and Sons, etc.

1) They are all male
2) Their concert audiences (that I was a part of) were predominantly female. The first two were close to 80% female, in my estimation.

But does the flip situation exist at all? Can any of us name a contemporary female musical act that draws a predominantly male audience? (I think the answer is "No" but I certainly don't know everything!)

Taking the question down a step, can any of us name a contemporary female music act that even draws a 50/50 split audience? (Consider that male groups/singers like Bruce Springsteen, Eagles, Elton John, Coldplay, Pearl Jam, draw TONS of women to their shoes, probably at least in the 50/50 range)

Or is it really just as unbalanced as I questioned in my OP?


This has been answered many times. Yes, it's imbalanced. As a society, we've internalized the norm that guy stuff is universal and chick stuff is marginal.

The point is not (where I suspect you want the conversation to go) that guy stuff is inherently superior to chick stuff. It means we've been taught that it is. It can be unlearned. In fact, we can unlearn the idea that stuff even has to be either guy stuff or chick stuff.

This is really not complicated at all.

I do not "want the conversation to go" anywhere in particular. If you think I constructed this debate to slam anyone, you are sorely mistaken. I think this is a fascinating topic, and I would like to think I have a track record on this forum of being reasonable and fair (and sometimes funny).

And I absolutely think unbalanced societal constructs explain many, if not most, of the differences in fandoms that we've discussed. But I'm not convinced it explains all of them.

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
I can tell by your unwillingness to really provide any additional feedback, that you really donít want to consider the option as it doesnít fit the feminist agenda that aside from genitals, thereís no difference in genders.

No additional feedback is necessary. My feedback was that neither your statements nor your link showed that testosterone causes aggression. Therefore, you haven't even made a case for me to begin to react to.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
I have problems though when anyone wants to play the "society is bad" game. My take is that people with victim syndrome should focus on themselves and see if they belief systems really impact their lives in any way shape or form. I think 99% of the time people that make these types of claims aren't being honest with themselves in that all their grand theories don't actually impact them at all apart from in their own head.

I think women and men both play the society is bad victim card and I find it really tough to listen too. Men think they are discriminated against (which is true but also not true) and women think the same thing (which is true but also not true). I think all people should just suck it up and focus on improving their lives.

Huh. I'm not a rabid SJW but this strikes me as pretty flipping complacent. Structural oppression and marginalization is a thing; it's not a grand theory and it's not in people's heads. Telling people to live with it seems defeatist. The status quo isn't always the best we can hope for.

I could say more but I'll leave it there.

I think it is all in people's heads or maybe better put they go looking for problems outside of themselves rather than looking at themselves. Are women given a fair go in society today ? Of course they are. Sure some people cop it but both sexes cop it. On the whole though we are living in a world that gives you so many opportunities. Focusing on on structural oppression and marginalization to me comes across as delusional. It's like focusing on the hole in the donut.

Is it okay for men to complain about how the laws are against them ? I work for a big company and women and minorities are definitely promoted as a priority. That means that capable deserving men will not be promoted sometimes. That is discrimination. I think it's crazy for men to complain about this because the modern world provides so many opportunities to all people today.

Iím curious about the assumption that the women and minorities who are promoted are less capable than their white male coworkers. For most of Western history, white men received such promotions by default, and equally or more qualified women and minorities were not even considered. One could thus view corporate efforts to ensure the consideration of ALL qualified candidates as a means of correcting earlier bias.

For any given position, only one person will be selected. It seems ridiculous to assume that the white man would always be the best person for the job, but again, that was most of Western history.

I don't believe in positive discrimination but you make a good point and that is why I don't like hearing guys complain about the situation. I also think that lots of women and minorities are extremely capable.

My point is that we shouldn't be looking through promotions and achievements through a gender or other bias. We all are so lucky but some people want to complain. I think that positive discrimination doesn't make things equal. I think it just causes resentment and creates unneeded friction within society.

I've had two really good bosses in my career and one was female. I've managed a lot of people and I don't see women or minorities as being anything other than as capable as white males. I am a white male but I work in IT and I'm the minority.

I should add that I've never experienced people at work going on about gender or whatever bias. I think it's a very small sub-set of society who play the victim. I can't respect people with that outlook and people with that outlook aren't always women. I see it just as much as men reacting to women who believe in the patriarchy.

There are problems within society but I really don't think it's as simple as white males are privileged and everyone else suffers. If you look at the MMM divorce thread and read about divorce people are getting very good at using the legal system to win a battle rather than trying to create a fair outcome.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 02:37:08 PM by steveo »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
I have problems though when anyone wants to play the "society is bad" game. My take is that people with victim syndrome should focus on themselves and see if they belief systems really impact their lives in any way shape or form. I think 99% of the time people that make these types of claims aren't being honest with themselves in that all their grand theories don't actually impact them at all apart from in their own head.

I think women and men both play the society is bad victim card and I find it really tough to listen too. Men think they are discriminated against (which is true but also not true) and women think the same thing (which is true but also not true). I think all people should just suck it up and focus on improving their lives.

Huh. I'm not a rabid SJW but this strikes me as pretty flipping complacent. Structural oppression and marginalization is a thing; it's not a grand theory and it's not in people's heads. Telling people to live with it seems defeatist. The status quo isn't always the best we can hope for.

I could say more but I'll leave it there.

I think it is all in people's heads or maybe better put they go looking for problems outside of themselves rather than looking at themselves. Are women given a fair go in society today ? Of course they are. Sure some people cop it but both sexes cop it. On the whole though we are living in a world that gives you so many opportunities. Focusing on on structural oppression and marginalization to me comes across as delusional. It's like focusing on the hole in the donut.

Is it okay for men to complain about how the laws are against them ? I work for a big company and women and minorities are definitely promoted as a priority. That means that capable deserving men will not be promoted sometimes. That is discrimination. I think it's crazy for men to complain about this because the modern world provides so many opportunities to all people today.

OMG let me roll my eyes so hard.

Focusing on structural oppression and marginalization is the only way to dismantle it.  Ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist?  Please.

I definitely don't ignore it. I'm stating that it is far far more complex than what some people want to state it is. I could argue rightly that women use the legal system to their advantage and that the structural oppression is against men. It's a valid argument in today's day and age.

I believe that some people are really up against it but it's not a societal thing. It's a cultural thing that is probably more relevant to their upbringing. For instance Trumps kids (male and female) have been given huge advantages in life whereas the poor aboriginal family in Australia don't have those same advantages. You can't though fix this issue because life is inherently unfair. In Australia they did try and fix this issue and it was disastrous. It let to a whole situation called the stolen generation.

I also think for the vast majority of people they are the ones who have the greatest impact in how they live their lives and the success they have. Societal marginalization probably constitutes .00001% towards everyone on here's chances of success in life.

I'm a short male and yet I want to play in the NBA and be a superstar earning millions of dollars per year. Is it really not fair that I don't get that opportunity or is that just the way the cookie crumbles.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 02:41:39 PM by steveo »

lhamo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8770
  • Location: Seattle

I also think for the vast majority of people they are the ones who have the greatest impact in how they live their lives and the success they have. Societal marginalization probably constitutes .00001% towards everyone on here's chances of success in life.


You really lack insight into how marginalization works in the US system. 

See, for example:

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666993130/zipcode-destiny-the-persistent-power-of-place-and-education

You can click through to the academic articles the podcast summary is based on if you want a more thorough overview.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745

I also think for the vast majority of people they are the ones who have the greatest impact in how they live their lives and the success they have. Societal marginalization probably constitutes .00001% towards everyone on here's chances of success in life.


You really lack insight into how marginalization works in the US system. 

See, for example:

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666993130/zipcode-destiny-the-persistent-power-of-place-and-education

You can click through to the academic articles the podcast summary is based on if you want a more thorough overview.

I think that you have it wrong though. Life is inherently unfair. We also live in a world where by your own effort you can improve your situation significantly.

My daughter is not disadvantaged but she sees loopholes in the education system and goes for those loopholes. She doesn't study hard to improve her life. She looks at the loopholes. I don't think that this is unusual at all. I think lots of people prefer scams to hard work.

My mum came from a disadvantaged background but she was white. My wife is a minority but came from a privileged background although her family was and is dysfunctional. Both my mum and my wife though just work freaken hard to improve their lives. They don't look for special support or help and they don't talk about being disadvantaged.

We are all born with different attributes and we all come from different backgrounds. We can all also make an effort to improve our lives.

I should add that I am all for providing everyone with access to education and health care and proper infrastructure and even a basic wage.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 02:58:17 PM by steveo »

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4153
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
I have problems though when anyone wants to play the "society is bad" game. My take is that people with victim syndrome should focus on themselves and see if they belief systems really impact their lives in any way shape or form. I think 99% of the time people that make these types of claims aren't being honest with themselves in that all their grand theories don't actually impact them at all apart from in their own head.

I think women and men both play the society is bad victim card and I find it really tough to listen too. Men think they are discriminated against (which is true but also not true) and women think the same thing (which is true but also not true). I think all people should just suck it up and focus on improving their lives.

Huh. I'm not a rabid SJW but this strikes me as pretty flipping complacent. Structural oppression and marginalization is a thing; it's not a grand theory and it's not in people's heads. Telling people to live with it seems defeatist. The status quo isn't always the best we can hope for.

I could say more but I'll leave it there.

I think it is all in people's heads or maybe better put they go looking for problems outside of themselves rather than looking at themselves. Are women given a fair go in society today ? Of course they are. Sure some people cop it but both sexes cop it. On the whole though we are living in a world that gives you so many opportunities. Focusing on on structural oppression and marginalization to me comes across as delusional. It's like focusing on the hole in the donut.

Is it okay for men to complain about how the laws are against them ? I work for a big company and women and minorities are definitely promoted as a priority. That means that capable deserving men will not be promoted sometimes. That is discrimination. I think it's crazy for men to complain about this because the modern world provides so many opportunities to all people today.

OMG let me roll my eyes so hard.

Focusing on structural oppression and marginalization is the only way to dismantle it.  Ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist?  Please.

I definitely don't ignore it. I'm stating that it is far far more complex than what some people want to state it is. I could argue rightly that women use the legal system to their advantage and that the structural oppression is against men. It's a valid argument in today's day and age.

I believe that some people are really up against it but it's not a societal thing. It's a cultural thing that is probably more relevant to their upbringing. For instance Trumps kids (male and female) have been given huge advantages in life whereas the poor aboriginal family in Australia don't have those same advantages. You can't though fix this issue because life is inherently unfair. In Australia they did try and fix this issue and it was disastrous. It let to a whole situation called the stolen generation.

I also think for the vast majority of people they are the ones who have the greatest impact in how they live their lives and the success they have. Societal marginalization probably constitutes .00001% towards everyone on here's chances of success in life.

I'm a short male and yet I want to play in the NBA and be a superstar earning millions of dollars per year. Is it really not fair that I don't get that opportunity or is that just the way the cookie crumbles.

Bless your heart, you sweet summer child. What a simple little life you must lead.

lhamo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8770
  • Location: Seattle

I also think for the vast majority of people they are the ones who have the greatest impact in how they live their lives and the success they have. Societal marginalization probably constitutes .00001% towards everyone on here's chances of success in life.


You really lack insight into how marginalization works in the US system. 

See, for example:

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666993130/zipcode-destiny-the-persistent-power-of-place-and-education

You can click through to the academic articles the podcast summary is based on if you want a more thorough overview.

I think that you have it wrong though. Life is inherently unfair. We also live in a world where by your own effort you can improve your situation significantly.

I'm happy for your mother, your wife and your daughter that they have learned to navigate the system.  That is great for them.

But given that you posted a fairly long response 11 minutes after I did, I'm guessing you didn't even bother to dig into the link I posted or the academic research it is based on.  So you are apparently content to continue to operate on your own ideas about how the world works, based on anecdotal evidence from your own immediate family, rather than looking at what actual studies of decades of widespread educational and demographic data say about how much certain things like your ethnic background, gender, economic status, and where you are born and to what kind of family impact the likelihood of your educational achievement and social mobility. 

Yes, everyone has the capacity to achieve things.  Even those growing up in the most disadvantaged, broken circumstances.  But starting from a premise that "life is unfair" and that any attempt to intervene in our social structures to level the playing field is pointless is a cop out.  I find it disgusting, actually.  Thank god there are people in the world running the program I visited this morning, which is making a real difference in the lives of some disadvantaged kids.  Because they care and believe that these kids deserve a shot at a good education and a better life.  That doesn't just happen.  People have to make it happen. 

OtherJen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 894
  • Location: Metro Detroit
We are all born with different attributes and we all come from different backgrounds. We can all also make an effort to improve our lives.

I should add that I am all for providing everyone with access to education and health care and proper infrastructure and even a basic wage.

I've inferred from several of your comments that you aren't from the USA, which might explain some of the lack of understanding. Access to adequate and affordable healthcare is a joke for many who live here. Access to a good-quality public elementary education depends largely on your parents' ability to establish residency in a wealthy area. Politicians in my own state just today voted to delay an increase in the state minimum wage for another decade. In other words, access to those basic aspects of society is very far from universal.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
steveo's problem is similar to what mine used to be.  He thinks that the playing field is level.  Or, if it's not level, it's equally unfair/difficult for everyone.  He also sees that "making it" in America is hard work, no matter who you are (except for generational wealth). 

What he doesn't see is that these ideas are wrong.  The truth is that the field is persistently and substantially tilted against women and minorities. 

Here's an example - steveo works in IT like I do.  He's probably worked around a lot of minorities and some women.  Here's the key question - how many of his bosses were men and how many were women?  If it's not close to 50-50, that's a problem. 

In today's world its possible for women to be in the workforce, but it's still very, very hard for them to obtain positions of authority.  That's systemic bias.  And if steveo looks around, he'll see it too.

robartsd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
  • Location: Northern California
What he doesn't see is that these ideas are wrong.  The truth is that the field is persistently and substantially tilted against women and minorities. 
While I fully agree that there are persistent issues with tilting against women and minorities in many (most?) workplaces in the US; I think most of the time the persisting discrimination is subtle enough that even most of the people perpetuating it are doing so subconsciously. It is also difficult to fully control for non-discriminatory factors that can impact the disparity of outcomes for men vs. women. Biological differences (discussed here mostly relating to sport) are one such factor. More often touted in arguments that the disparity of outcomes for men vs. women in the workplace is that women are more likely to sacrifice career for family; but couples could be choosing to have a woman sacrifice career rather than her male partner sacrificing his due to workplace discrimination (perhaps even subconsciously).

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
What he doesn't see is that these ideas are wrong.  The truth is that the field is persistently and substantially tilted against women and minorities. 
While I fully agree that there are persistent issues with tilting against women and minorities in many (most?) workplaces in the US; I think most of the time the persisting discrimination is subtle enough that even most of the people perpetuating it are doing so subconsciously. It is also difficult to fully control for non-discriminatory factors that can impact the disparity of outcomes for men vs. women. Biological differences (discussed here mostly relating to sport) are one such factor. More often touted in arguments that the disparity of outcomes for men vs. women in the workplace is that women are more likely to sacrifice career for family; but couples could be choosing to have a woman sacrifice career rather than her male partner sacrificing his due to workplace discrimination (perhaps even subconsciously).

Yes, that's precisely correct.  That's why it's called systemic bias.  The people doing it don't even realize it.  It's not their "fault", but it is a logical outcome of a system that favors white men over other groups. 

To answer my own questions re: bosses, even in a fairly progressive field like IT that doesn't have a lot of cultural baggage (because it's so new compared to other career fields), I have had 8 bosses in the time I've been doing IT.  2 were women, 6 were men.  That's a pretty massive tilt toward men.  Oh, and zero of my bosses were minorities. 

Here's a little thought experiment to illustrate my point.  What if you started working at a new company (pay raise, yay!) and once you got in and started working for a while, you realized that 80% of all managers were women.  That'd feel weird, right?  That's because systemic bias has conditioned you by mainly having men in leadership roles at almost all companies. 

Again, it's nobody's fault, it's just what we've inherited from the past.  And it is better than it used to be.  But we still have a long way to go. 

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3194
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Here's an example - steveo works in IT like I do.  He's probably worked around a lot of minorities and some women.  Here's the key question - how many of his bosses were men and how many were women?  If it's not close to 50-50, that's a problem. 

A couple thoughts:

1.  why should the ratio of men:women bosses in IT be 50:50?  Is the ratio of men:women workers in IT 50:50?  The ratio of degree holders 50:50?  Should the ratio of bosses be pegged at 50:50 or at something closer to one of those other metrics?  If the problem is not enough women going into IT overall that brings me to

2.  If steveo worked in garbage collection, or crab fishing, or as an infantry Marine, or as an electrical lineman, or a nurse, or a teacher, or a Hooter's waitress, should the management team always be 50:50?

Sure, that's trite, but the question remains, are we going to insist if every field is not 50:50 men/women, something's wrong?  If there are truly barriers to women (or men!) entering a particular field, I'm all for removing them as best we reasonably can to encourage both to participate.  But at the end of the day not everything is going to be 50/50, and it won't necessarily be for nefarious or even preventable reasons, so you can't automatically say =/= 50/50  is wrong.


tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Here's an example - steveo works in IT like I do.  He's probably worked around a lot of minorities and some women.  Here's the key question - how many of his bosses were men and how many were women?  If it's not close to 50-50, that's a problem. 

A couple thoughts:

1.  why should the ratio of men:women bosses in IT be 50:50?  Is the ratio of men:women workers in IT 50:50?  The ratio of degree holders 50:50?  Should the ratio of bosses be pegged at 50:50 or at something closer to one of those other metrics?  If the problem is not enough women going into IT overall that brings me to

2.  If steveo worked in garbage collection, or crab fishing, or as an infantry Marine, or as an electrical lineman, or a nurse, or a teacher, or a Hooter's waitress, should the management team always be 50:50?

Sure, that's trite, but the question remains, are we going to insist if every field is not 50:50 men/women, something's wrong?  If there are truly barriers to women (or men!) entering a particular field, I'm all for removing them as best we reasonably can to encourage both to participate.  But at the end of the day not everything is going to be 50/50, and it won't necessarily be for nefarious or even preventable reasons, so you can't automatically say =/= 50/50  is wrong.

Yeah, to answer question 1, the workforce that I've seen in the past 10 years or so is pretty close to 50/50 men/women.  Ergo, the ratio of bosses should also be close to 50/50.

As for the other field, I don't work in them so I don't really have any insight.  But I can say that certain jobs seem to be "traditionally male" and other jobs "traditionally female", so you're dealing with even heavier cultural baggage.  I mean, it just seems weird for a woman to be a crab fisherman, right?  That's historical/cultural bias. 

Anyway, the other reason I chose IT is because it's new enough that it doesn't have a lot of that inherited gender expectation.  And it relies mostly on intelligence/brainwork, so success really depends on how smart you are and how well you solve problems, which is not gendered at all.  And yet, we still see a massive tilt toward men in leadership roles. 

Why do you think that is?

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3194
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Here's an example - steveo works in IT like I do.  He's probably worked around a lot of minorities and some women.  Here's the key question - how many of his bosses were men and how many were women?  If it's not close to 50-50, that's a problem. 

A couple thoughts:

1.  why should the ratio of men:women bosses in IT be 50:50?  Is the ratio of men:women workers in IT 50:50?  The ratio of degree holders 50:50?  Should the ratio of bosses be pegged at 50:50 or at something closer to one of those other metrics?  If the problem is not enough women going into IT overall that brings me to

2.  If steveo worked in garbage collection, or crab fishing, or as an infantry Marine, or as an electrical lineman, or a nurse, or a teacher, or a Hooter's waitress, should the management team always be 50:50?

Sure, that's trite, but the question remains, are we going to insist if every field is not 50:50 men/women, something's wrong?  If there are truly barriers to women (or men!) entering a particular field, I'm all for removing them as best we reasonably can to encourage both to participate.  But at the end of the day not everything is going to be 50/50, and it won't necessarily be for nefarious or even preventable reasons, so you can't automatically say =/= 50/50  is wrong.

Yeah, to answer question 1, the workforce that I've seen in the past 10 years or so is pretty close to 50/50 men/women.  Ergo, the ratio of bosses should also be close to 50/50.

Anyway, the other reason I chose IT is because it's new enough that it doesn't have a lot of that inherited gender expectation.  And it relies mostly on intelligence/brainwork, so success really depends on how smart you are and how well you solve problems, which is not gendered at all.  And yet, we still see a massive tilt toward men in leadership roles. 

Why do you think that is?

Why do I think that is?  Because even when I was in college 15 years ago, IT work was considered for nerdy types, recluses, social shutins, this type:



So the guys (yeah, guys) who went into it and got good at it are now running it.  It is probably only in the last 10 years that our image of a "computer nerd" has shifted away from the above and become fashionable and sexy, so it's going to take some time for that to filter into management.  Are some IT types hostile to women?  Of course, there's the whole Gamergate thing, I get that, and it's wrong.  But let's not pretend that a large number of women my age (mid 30s) didn't turn their noses up at IT work for a long time as being not cool/sexy/whatever.

Quote
As for the other field, I don't work in them so I don't really have any insight.  But I can say that certain jobs seem to be "traditionally male" and other jobs "traditionally female", so you're dealing with even heavier cultural baggage.  I mean, it just seems weird for a woman to be a crab fisherman, right?  That's historical/cultural bias. 

Does it seem weird?  Is it due to bias?  Or is it because crab fishing is an EXTREMELY dangerous profession that, outside of the captain of the boat and maybe a few exceptions, tends to pay relatively poorly.  So really, women are wise to avoid it.  My point is that women tend to want gender equality when the jobs are perceived as desirable (IT, management, etc) but not when the jobs are perceived as undesirable (often because they are dangerous) (garbagemen, power line workers, crab fishermen). 

Hirondelle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1133
To add to Tyort's observation, I work in academia. I'm in a pediatric research lab and I'd say up to 70-80% of current PhD candidates is female. The professors/PIs however? Or actually, even at the postdoc level you already see this. There's only a handfull of females while the vast majority is male. This might be an inheritance from the past (for the profs at least) and be subject to change in the near future once the 'new generation' that is 70+% female makes it through the postdoc and tenure track pipelines, but it does seem a pattern in a more female-dominated field.

It's also pretty well documented that people tend to hire someone who looks like them. Like, not necessarily in phycical charactistics, but more overall. So a white male from a middle class family that has to choose between 3 candidates that aren't too extremely different is most likely to pick the one that looks most like himself. Depending on the candidates and his own preferences/views. This can be anywhere between 'Hey cool we're born in the same city/went to the same college' and 'He's a white college-educated male with a decent background' but it's considered one of the reasons the 'old boys network' still excists. Most of these things happen unconsciously though so it's hard to break through the pattern. Btw, this doesn't only happen in 'white male' companies ofcourse. Try to apply for a job in a beauty studio being a white male. Or get a high position in a Chinese or Japanese company as a westerner.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315


Does it seem weird?  Is it due to bias?  Or is it because crab fishing is an EXTREMELY dangerous profession that, outside of the captain of the boat and maybe a few exceptions, tends to pay relatively poorly.  So really, women are wise to avoid it.  My point is that women tend to want gender equality when the jobs are perceived as desirable (IT, management, etc) but not when the jobs are perceived as undesirable (often because they are dangerous) (garbagemen, power line workers, crab fishermen).

Right now thereís around 4500 workplace fatalities a year, with about 93% of those being male (and that percentage has increased in the last 5ish years.

Like you mentioned above - you donít see women just diving into these dangerous, hard, physical labor jobs that they are so many other jobs that have typically been male dominated for the last 50 years. Are there more now than 50 years ago? Sure, but nowhere near the same rate as these dangerous, physical labor jobs. Of course, feminists will say that itís due to the culture and these being ďmenísĒ jobs, but thatís no different than other positions of the past like IT or doctors.

It seems like there is a push to put women in all these amazing, formerly male dominated careers, but how about the other ones? How about the hard physical labor jobs in the elements 80 hrs a week that are contributing to these 93% male industry death rates.

By all means - if these 50:50 management arguments make sense, then the 50:50 death rates should also be there.

Sounds convenient... ďhey we arenít getting equal opportunity with men for all the great jobs in the work place.. oh wait, but men can also keep all the hard physical labor, dangerous jobs to themselves...Ē
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 03:10:40 PM by use2betrix »

charis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
It is probably only in the last 10 years that our image of a "computer nerd" has shifted away from the above and become fashionable and sexy, so it's going to take some time for that to filter into management.  Are some IT types hostile to women?  Of course, there's the whole Gamergate thing, I get that, and it's wrong.  But let's not pretend that a large number of women my age (mid 30s) didn't turn their noses up at IT work for a long time as being not cool/sexy/whatever.

This is a steaming pile of hostile sexism.  Women didn't want to work in IT because it wasn't fashionable, cool or sexy? 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-first-women-in-tech-didnt-leavemen-pushed-them-out-1512907200

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Here's an example - steveo works in IT like I do.  He's probably worked around a lot of minorities and some women.  Here's the key question - how many of his bosses were men and how many were women?  If it's not close to 50-50, that's a problem. 

A couple thoughts:

1.  why should the ratio of men:women bosses in IT be 50:50?  Is the ratio of men:women workers in IT 50:50?  The ratio of degree holders 50:50?  Should the ratio of bosses be pegged at 50:50 or at something closer to one of those other metrics?  If the problem is not enough women going into IT overall that brings me to

2.  If steveo worked in garbage collection, or crab fishing, or as an infantry Marine, or as an electrical lineman, or a nurse, or a teacher, or a Hooter's waitress, should the management team always be 50:50?

Sure, that's trite, but the question remains, are we going to insist if every field is not 50:50 men/women, something's wrong?  If there are truly barriers to women (or men!) entering a particular field, I'm all for removing them as best we reasonably can to encourage both to participate.  But at the end of the day not everything is going to be 50/50, and it won't necessarily be for nefarious or even preventable reasons, so you can't automatically say =/= 50/50  is wrong.

Yeah, to answer question 1, the workforce that I've seen in the past 10 years or so is pretty close to 50/50 men/women.  Ergo, the ratio of bosses should also be close to 50/50.

Anyway, the other reason I chose IT is because it's new enough that it doesn't have a lot of that inherited gender expectation.  And it relies mostly on intelligence/brainwork, so success really depends on how smart you are and how well you solve problems, which is not gendered at all.  And yet, we still see a massive tilt toward men in leadership roles. 

Why do you think that is?

Why do I think that is?  Because even when I was in college 15 years ago, IT work was considered for nerdy types, recluses, social shutins, this type:



So the guys (yeah, guys) who went into it and got good at it are now running it.  It is probably only in the last 10 years that our image of a "computer nerd" has shifted away from the above and become fashionable and sexy, so it's going to take some time for that to filter into management.  Are some IT types hostile to women?  Of course, there's the whole Gamergate thing, I get that, and it's wrong.  But let's not pretend that a large number of women my age (mid 30s) didn't turn their noses up at IT work for a long time as being not cool/sexy/whatever.

Quote
As for the other field, I don't work in them so I don't really have any insight.  But I can say that certain jobs seem to be "traditionally male" and other jobs "traditionally female", so you're dealing with even heavier cultural baggage.  I mean, it just seems weird for a woman to be a crab fisherman, right?  That's historical/cultural bias. 

Does it seem weird?  Is it due to bias?  Or is it because crab fishing is an EXTREMELY dangerous profession that, outside of the captain of the boat and maybe a few exceptions, tends to pay relatively poorly.  So really, women are wise to avoid it.  My point is that women tend to want gender equality when the jobs are perceived as desirable (IT, management, etc) but not when the jobs are perceived as undesirable (often because they are dangerous) (garbagemen, power line workers, crab fishermen).

I used to think like you.  Then I looked around.  The evidence is overwhelming if you are paying attention.  I changed my beliefs based on new information/understanding.  It seems like you're not even open to the idea that women are at a disadvantage when it comes to getting leadership positions. 

BTW, I've worked at 2 of the largest IT corporations in the world (HP and Oracle) and you're ideas that nerdy dudes make up the workforce isn't even close to accurate.  You're basing your opinion on cliches from the 90s.  I've also worked at several smaller companies (and startups) and the parity is even more obvious there.  Women have made a very strong push into the technical fields.  And yet, it's almost always the guys that get the promotions and the leadership positions.

Again, I ask you - why do you think that is?  If you're honest, you'll have to admit that the playing field isn't level.  There's really no other explanation.

I'd also point out (again) that these disparities were much, much worse in the past.  I read a lot of history (and old books), and it's shocking how badly women were treated by society in the past.  More like property than people.  Hell, even in my OWN lifetime, I can remember how shocked I was to find out that women couldn't even apply for a credit card without their husband co-signing.  That's 30 years ago.  So yeah, things have gotten better, and like I said, still a long way to go. 

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
It seems like there is a push to put women in all these amazing, formerly male dominated careers, but how about the other ones? How about the hard physical labor jobs in the elements 80 hrs a week that are contributing to these 93% male industry death rates.

By all means - if these 50:50 management arguments make sense, then the 50:50 death rates should also be there.

Sounds convenient... ďhey we arenít getting equal opportunity with men for all the great jobs in the work place.. oh wait, but men can also keep all the hard physical labor, dangerous jobs to themselves...Ē

Yes, I do want men and women to be equally represented in jobs that require hard physical labor. And I want men and women to be equally represented in jobs like nursing assistants and daycare providers. And I want men and women to be equally represented in prestigious IT jobs. This is because I want gender stereotypes to go away, because I am a feminist and an anti-sexist.

The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

RyanAtTanagra

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 988
  • Location: SF Bay, CA
The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

That's because there are "feminists" that do want that.  And I put that in quotes because I know that's not what feminism is, but there are women like that, and they call themselves feminists, and they get a lot of attention, and they become a regretful face of feminism.  I say this as someone to whom 'feminism' is a relatively new term, and I had to actively go figure out what it really was because I saw reasonable people calling themselves themselves feminists and I'd go 'but you don't seem unhinged...'.  So I looked it up and went 'oh, that's what it really is... that's me!'.  But I had to make the effort to learn that.  Most people don't make effort to understand things, which is of course their fault, but that's why some people think feminism = women that want all men to die.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315

The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

If you think that was implied then you sure are reaching to feel insulted. I would expect nothing less based on the content of your posts in this thread, however.

MOD EDIT: Personal insults aren't helpful or allowed. Cheers.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2018, 09:55:02 AM by arebelspy »

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

In some cases near-equal - really?  Where?  Which industries? 

But even the phrase "in some cases near equal" even if true (it's not), still means the inverse of the phrase is true.  To put it explicitly:

"In some cases near-equal"

also means:

"In most cases NOT near-equal"

So by your own statement we have a huge problem because in most cases things are not even near equal. 



Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

In some cases near-equal - really?  Where?  Which industries? 

But even the phrase "in some cases near equal" even if true (it's not), still means the inverse of the phrase is true.  To put it explicitly:

"In some cases near-equal"

also means:

"In most cases NOT near-equal"

So by your own statement we have a huge problem because in most cases things are not even near equal.

This chart explains what I previously said. In earlier generations there were more males, now becoming more equal..

https://www.athenahealth.com/insight/healthcare-future-female

WHAT ON EARTH WILL MEN DO WHEN PHYSICIANS ARE PRIMARILY FEMALE? PRANCE AROUND FORUMS CLAIMING ITS NOT FAIR UNTIL ITS BACK TO 50/50?? /sarcasm
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 04:31:16 PM by use2betrix »

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

If you think that was implied then you sure are reaching to feel insulted.


For the record, here's what use2betrix said. You be the judge.

Sounds convenient... ďhey we arenít getting equal opportunity with men for all the great jobs in the work place.. oh wait, but men can also keep all the hard physical labor, dangerous jobs to themselves...Ē

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

If you think that was implied then you sure are reaching to feel insulted.


For the record, here's what use2betrix said. You be the judge.

Sounds convenient... ďhey we arenít getting equal opportunity with men for all the great jobs in the work place.. oh wait, but men can also keep all the hard physical labor, dangerous jobs to themselves...Ē

Find me a graph showing that women are entering the manual labor work anywhere near the same rate as positions like medical, law, etc. then you can prove your point that women are really aiming for ď50/50 across the board.Ē

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

In some cases near-equal - really?  Where?  Which industries? 

But even the phrase "in some cases near equal" even if true (it's not), still means the inverse of the phrase is true.  To put it explicitly:

"In some cases near-equal"

also means:

"In most cases NOT near-equal"

So by your own statement we have a huge problem because in most cases things are not even near equal.

This chart explains what I previously said. In earlier generations there were more males, now becoming more equal..

https://www.athenahealth.com/insight/healthcare-future-female

WHAT ON EARTH WILL MEN DO WHEN PHYSICIANS ARE PRIMARILY FEMALE? PRANCE AROUND FORUMS CLAIMING ITS NOT FAIR UNTIL ITS BACK TO 50/50?? /sarcasm

That's cool about the young dr's tilting female.  I did not know that, thank you. 

To answer your sarcasm seriously, I do think that some professions will naturally tilt toward being female dominated, once artificial, gender based restraints are removed.  I'm fine with that.  Hell, we're already seeing it at schools - girls are starting to pull away from boys when it comes to education.  Which means the future will probably tilt female.  And that makes me happy.  We've had this huge injustice built into our society for so long and now it's finally being redressed.  Doesn't that make you happy?

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

That's because there are "feminists" that do want that.  And I put that in quotes because I know that's not what feminism is, but there are women like that, and they call themselves feminists, and they get a lot of attention, and they become a regretful face of feminism.

I recognize that you are expressing yourself reasonably, so I don't want this to come across as confrontational. But I'm curious where you're seeing this kind of rhetoric.

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
The implication that feminists want women to have better jobs than men is insulting.

If you think that was implied then you sure are reaching to feel insulted.


For the record, here's what use2betrix said. You be the judge.

Sounds convenient... ďhey we arenít getting equal opportunity with men for all the great jobs in the work place.. oh wait, but men can also keep all the hard physical labor, dangerous jobs to themselves...Ē

Find me a graph showing that women are entering the manual labor work anywhere near the same rate as positions like medical, law, etc. then you can prove your point that women are really aiming for ď50/50 across the board.Ē

(1) I never said that. I said it's what *I* want.

(2) My purpose in responding was to point out that you did, in fact, say that feminists want women to have better jobs than men, despite claiming that you hadn't said that. That's all.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
I will also say this  - a lot of the panic I see from males re: feminism and the workplace is that they somehow feel "there's only so many good jobs out there, and if women take the good jobs, then us guys are getting screwed".

So, fear of economic loss is the underlying drive for their viewpoints. 

But in fact, the more high earners we have, the more the whole economy moves upward.  It's not a zero sum game.  The more people that excel and have great careers, the more it helps everybody. 

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12357
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

Totally off topic, but what the hell . . . What do you think the odds are of a guy getting a job as a daycare provider or early ECE?  I get that it's not a particularly glamorous job or anything, but that's one of the few jobs I can think of where odds are legitimately stacked against guys.  Our society looks uneasily at any man interested in spending time with young kids.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

I was a CNA for several years and spent many years working in nursing homes. Have first hand experience there. Very interesting experience being about the only male working in a field thatís vastly dominated by women. I mentioned some of my experience about it earlier in this thread.

Also, while Iím sure you will deny it because it doesnít fit your agenda, I feel fairly comfortable saying that a lot of parents might not prefer a lot of male daycare providers.

Having worked as a CNA, and also a highly dangerous labor position, both for several years, they really arenít comparable in terms of risk to life or health..
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 05:33:55 PM by use2betrix »

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

Totally off topic, but what the hell . . . What do you think the odds are of a guy getting a job as a daycare provider or early ECE?  I get that it's not a particularly glamorous job or anything, but that's one of the few jobs I can think of where odds are legitimately stacked against guys.  Our society looks uneasily at any man interested in spending time with young kids.

Bingo - during a recent sabbatical we spent a month at my parents house in a very nice family oriented neighborhood. Each morning Iíd get up early and beat the heat and take my dog on a long walk. Iím a young, fit, clean cut male. Kids on the way to school always wanted to stop and pet my dog, which was great for his socialization as a young GSD puppy. Sometimes though, Iíd get that look, that ďfeelingĒ from parents like I was some kind of creep. It was odd and boarderline uncomfortable at times. Sad as well, but honestly, in this day and age I can understand. I donít have kids of my own yet, but can still understand.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 05:32:30 PM by use2betrix »

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1315
I will also say this  - a lot of the panic I see from males re: feminism and the workplace is that they somehow feel "there's only so many good jobs out there, and if women take the good jobs, then us guys are getting screwed".

So, fear of economic loss is the underlying drive for their viewpoints. 

But in fact, the more high earners we have, the more the whole economy moves upward.  It's not a zero sum game.  The more people that excel and have great careers, the more it helps everybody.

Sounds like the males youíre around are serious losers, no offense. Thatís an embarrassing, shameful, and insecure attitude to have.

Fortunately the base of my career was built on working through manual labor/trades, and weíve already established that women arenít chomping at the bit to take those kind of jobs...

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

I was a CNA for several years and spent many years working in nursing homes. Have first hand experience there. Very interesting experience being about the only male working in a field thatís vastly dominated by women. I mentioned some of my experience about it earlier in this thread.

Also, while Iím sure you will deny it because it doesnít fit your agenda, I feel fairly comfortable saying that a lot of parents might not prefer a lot of male daycare providers.

Having worked as a CNA, and also a highly dangerous labor position, both for several years, they really arenít comparable in terms of risk to life or health..

Well, you didn't answer my question, and the response you did give is full of red herrings (when did I or anyone ever say that being a nursing assistant is dangerous?), but whatever. OK, what's my "agenda," and why do you disagree with it?

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6074
I will also say this  - a lot of the panic I see from males re: feminism and the workplace is that they somehow feel "there's only so many good jobs out there, and if women take the good jobs, then us guys are getting screwed".

So, fear of economic loss is the underlying drive for their viewpoints. 

But in fact, the more high earners we have, the more the whole economy moves upward.  It's not a zero sum game.  The more people that excel and have great careers, the more it helps everybody.
Lordy Lordy, I'm an engineer, and if I had a nickel for every time I heard I was taking a job from a "good man with a family to support"

- If a man was as good as me at my job, willing to work for what I get paid, they'd have it already

Haven't heard that lately though.  A few years ago an older male coworker was probing gently, trying to figure out if I was at all justified in my general grumpiness about pay.  And his comment was "well, your salary isn't LOW or anything".  Then I pointed out how much more the men made.  Then I think he realized it was a sore subject, because he's 15 years older, nearing retirement, kids are grown, and he makes a lot more money.

More recently, he was concerned that I hadn't had a raise in awhile.  I said "don't worry, I got more $ with this last promotion - because I refused to take the job otherwise - so I'm now making the SAME as X,Y, and Z were in 2011!"  Then he looked like he felt kinda bad.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6074
Itís interesting when you look at the statistics of all the ďgoodĒ jobs previously male dominated that are now more split. Business, executives, IT, Drís, etc. women wanted those jobs (understandable) and now have a much stronger presence, in some cases near equal.

Again - what about all the manual labor jobs? Women donít want them, period. Itís not like theyíre lining the fences to apply for them. No guesswork about it. Itís not that women canít partake in these dangerous jobs, they donít want them, period.

Speaking from vast first hand experience in the industries.

And men don't want jobs as nursing assistants or daycare providers. What's your point? Spell it out.

Totally off topic, but what the hell . . . What do you think the odds are of a guy getting a job as a daycare provider or early ECE?  I get that it's not a particularly glamorous job or anything, but that's one of the few jobs I can think of where odds are legitimately stacked against guys.  Our society looks uneasily at any man interested in spending time with young kids.
Depends a lot on where you live, I suppose.  I'll make a generalization - it's probably more common and accepted in more liberal areas.  While daycare providers in my area DO overwhelmingly skew female - we do have male daycare providers.

We do have a lot of male child care providers at the after school programs.
There are a lot of male camp counselors, for camps in kids as young as 3.
It seems like almost everyone (kids, parents) really like our male teachers.  Both in the same grade.  Which is interesting - another friend who is a teacher told me it's good that they did that.  At her school, the only male teacher (or maybe two) are in different grades - and kids/ parents overwhelmingly want that teacher (elementary).

We have a lot of teenagers to young men in my 'hood who regularly babysit.  It pays pretty well.

But I'd imagine that wouldn't happen where I grew up - much easier to get a job mowing lawns for extra dough, or shoveling snow.  And where I grew up, childcare doesn't pay NEAR what it does here.

I think I read somewhere once that as women entered various jobs, the average pay went down.  Found it!

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated-field-the-pay-drops.html

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
I really don't understand people like steveo and use2betrix.  Do they really think that women get a fair shake in our society?  I mean, that's the main issue, isn't it?  Is it harder to make it as a woman than it is as a man. 

Who knows, maybe for their next argument they can explain to us all how minorities don't have any social barriers either, and just can't succeed because they are lazy. 

That was sarcasm in case it wasn't clear.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
I really don't understand people like steveo and use2betrix.  Do they really think that women get a fair shake in our society?  I mean, that's the main issue, isn't it?  Is it harder to make it as a woman than it is as a man. 

Who knows, maybe for their next argument they can explain to us all how minorities don't have any social barriers either, and just can't succeed because they are lazy. 

That was sarcasm in case it wasn't clear.

Yes I do think that the vast majority of women and minorities get a fair go in society. It's not harder to make it as a woman or a minority than as a white male. I am married to an Asian woman and I work with women and minorities as a matter of course.

I don't see any discrimination at all in the work place.

I should add that the other big part of my life is going to the gym. We seem to accept all different minorities and women at the gym. I'm a small middle aged guy and it's harder for me to succeed than big younger men but I don't go and cry about discrimination.

I have heaps and heaps of friends who are women and minorities and they have never complained to me about racism/discrimination in a serious fashion. I went out to a Christmas picnic yesterday and there was a joke that I was the token white male. One guy at work calls me racist really loudly at times but it's a joke. He has the same job as me and is younger than me so he certainly hasn't been discriminated against. He is also paid more than me.

As for minorities not succeeding because they are lazy you clearly don't know the people that I know who come from minority backgrounds. They work harder than me (I'm lazy) and do very very well.

I'd be very careful when it comes to assuming that I am somehow racist at all. My wife is Filipino and my kids are pretty clearly 1/2 Filipino. I have heaps of friends who have emigrated to my country and are minorities.

I'd add the minority label is even getting a little old where I live. I don't live in an area or work in an environment dominated by white males. I'm a white male, my wife is Filipino and the kids are mixed. My next door neighbours are Indian on one side and Korean on the other.

Yes some people get it easier than others but it's really about being bought up in privileged environments. You can't change that easily though. Do you stop allowing rich people to give their kids easy jobs ? Do you stop all forms of inheritance ?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 07:49:39 PM by steveo »

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
I really don't understand people like steveo and use2betrix.  Do they really think that women get a fair shake in our society?  I mean, that's the main issue, isn't it?  Is it harder to make it as a woman than it is as a man. 

Who knows, maybe for their next argument they can explain to us all how minorities don't have any social barriers either, and just can't succeed because they are lazy. 

That was sarcasm in case it wasn't clear.

Yes I do think that the vast majority of women and minorities get a fair go in society. It's not harder to make it as a woman or a minority than as a white male. I am married to an Asian woman and I work with women and minorities as a matter of course.

I don't see any discrimination at all in the work place.


I should add that the other big part of my life is going to the gym. We seem to accept all different minorities and women at the gym. I'm a small middle aged guy and it's harder for me to succeed than big younger men but I don't go and cry about discrimination.

I have heaps and heaps of friends who are women and minorities and they have never complained to me about racism/discrimination in a serious fashion. I went out to a Christmas picnic yesterday and there was a joke that I was the token white male. One guy at work calls me racist really loudly at times but it's a joke. He has the same job as me and is younger than me so he certainly hasn't been discriminated against. He is also paid more than me.

As for minorities not succeeding because they are lazy you clearly don't know the people that I know who come from minority backgrounds. They work harder than me (I'm lazy) and do very very well.

I'd be very careful when it comes to assuming that I am somehow racist at all. My wife is Fillipino and my kids are pretty clearly 1/2 Fillipino. I have heaps of friends who have emigrated to my country and are minorities.

I'd add the minority label is even getting a little old where I live. I don't live in an area or work in an environment dominated by white males.

Yes some people get it easier than others but it's really about being bought up in privileged environments. You can't change that easily though. Do you stop allowing rich people to give their kids easy jobs ? Do you stop all forms of inheritance ?

That's just like, your opinion, man.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
I really don't understand people like steveo and use2betrix.  Do they really think that women get a fair shake in our society?  I mean, that's the main issue, isn't it?  Is it harder to make it as a woman than it is as a man. 

Who knows, maybe for their next argument they can explain to us all how minorities don't have any social barriers either, and just can't succeed because they are lazy. 

That was sarcasm in case it wasn't clear.

Yes I do think that the vast majority of women and minorities get a fair go in society. It's not harder to make it as a woman or a minority than as a white male. I am married to an Asian woman and I work with women and minorities as a matter of course.

I don't see any discrimination at all in the work place.


I should add that the other big part of my life is going to the gym. We seem to accept all different minorities and women at the gym. I'm a small middle aged guy and it's harder for me to succeed than big younger men but I don't go and cry about discrimination.

I have heaps and heaps of friends who are women and minorities and they have never complained to me about racism/discrimination in a serious fashion. I went out to a Christmas picnic yesterday and there was a joke that I was the token white male. One guy at work calls me racist really loudly at times but it's a joke. He has the same job as me and is younger than me so he certainly hasn't been discriminated against. He is also paid more than me.

As for minorities not succeeding because they are lazy you clearly don't know the people that I know who come from minority backgrounds. They work harder than me (I'm lazy) and do very very well.

I'd be very careful when it comes to assuming that I am somehow racist at all. My wife is Fillipino and my kids are pretty clearly 1/2 Fillipino. I have heaps of friends who have emigrated to my country and are minorities.

I'd add the minority label is even getting a little old where I live. I don't live in an area or work in an environment dominated by white males.

Yes some people get it easier than others but it's really about being bought up in privileged environments. You can't change that easily though. Do you stop allowing rich people to give their kids easy jobs ? Do you stop all forms of inheritance ?

That's just like, your opinion, man.

That my wife is Filipino ? Do you think she lied to me ?

As for discrimination in the workplace to be fair you are partially correct. I work in a big corporate that actively promotes minorities and women. I assume though that isn't what you are talking about or is that okay ?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 07:52:36 PM by steveo »

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1993
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
You can't have the Dude as an avatar and then not get a Big Lebowski reference.

Anyway, I work a big corporation too and it's true, there's a big push to make things better.  And things ARE better.  But as I've been saying, there's still a ways to go. 

Until then, I'm glad there's still people sounding the alarm and continuing to push for change. 

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2504
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Totally off topic, but what the hell . . . What do you think the odds are of a guy getting a job as a daycare provider or early ECE?  I get that it's not a particularly glamorous job or anything, but that's one of the few jobs I can think of where odds are legitimately stacked against guys.  Our society looks uneasily at any man interested in spending time with young kids.

I've seen it happen, but you're right that it's rare.

Fortunately, it so happens that I have a great idea that will allow men to flock to early childhood education jobs: End gendered roles and expectations and stereotypes! There's no reason a man can't make a good daycare provider, other than the fact that he and everyone else has been told that taking care of children is women's work.

Oh, believe me, I get the nervousness. Men commit far more violent crime than women, and no one wants to subject their children to that risk. But the violence is learned; it's not inherent. Our culture socializes men to be aggressive,* a situation that is fair to absolutely no one. We can agree to stop this teaching at any time, and once we do, violence statistics will even out between the sexes.


*I'm not saying all men are aggressive; that's clearly false. I'm saying that's the expectation they're swimming against.

runbikerun

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
"It's not harder to make it as a woman or a minority than as a white male."

This is, not to put too fine a point on it, wrong.