What’s wrong with men?

[Wrenchturner]

Why are you being like this?

Because I disagree with you.

I shared examples of bosses and patients openly commenting on my breasts. I've had a boss stick his hand down my shirt "as a joke", I've had colleagues insist I only have my position because I fucked my employer, I've had my success in my doctorate program threatened because I criticized the dean for overtly sexualizing a student.

Actually you didn't.  Not in this thread, anyway.  But I believe you that you've had terrible sexist experiences.

I don't hate men, I don't think men are bad, if anything, I feel for men and the fact that they're socialized under extremes of toxic pressure. GuitarStv's story is a prime example of how he experienced the horrors of toxic masculinity.

The part where he leered at women?  That's him being a victim?  Yeah, I don't think so.

You can choose to see women complaining about the toxicity that we've lived through our entire lives and relate to us because you too have been subjected to it in different ways, or you can disregard us and treat us like a bunch of whiny bitches.

Don't worry, we're used to it.

This is not what I'm doing.

[Tyler durden]

@Tyler durden it’s okay to seek to learn more about things. What will you do with the responses you’ve received? How will this information affect your future behaviors?

Well, I refined my question a little. So its more of what Malcat was saying. Its OK to notice, just dont stare. That would be the same view I hold.

If the responses piled on against my perspective I would try to digest it and reconsider. It is helpful to hear other voices, especially female voices on subjects like these. I'll say though, nothing changes a man's view ( Or at least it should.  ) on what is and isn't appropriate towards women like raising a couple. Which I am in the process of doing.

[Metalcat]

@Wrenchturner could you clarify what you mean? I’m reading that you believe it is unjust to be upset when someone stares at a part of your body in a way that is commonly known to be objectification and bordering on harassment because that person is male? Is objectification/harassment inextricably male an impossible for any male identified person to NOT participate in? If you meant something different, please help me understand.

I've been saying more or less the same thing all along--that evolutionary psychology exists, and it causes gendered outcomes.  Everyone knows that there are women who use their sexual prowess for power moves, but the ethics of this are only regarded in retrospect, indeed to quote Moose here:

Don't stare at women that haven't asked you to, how they dress is for them, or who they decide it's for. Not you.

This relativism doesn't work.

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.  This will be called victim-blaming or something, and there's definitely a physical power discrepancy between men and women, but the double standard of "I'm going to wear what I like and it's everyone else's problem" is a pretty unsophisticated philosophy.

"In this one particular instance someone teased me for being afraid of something innocuous so I assumed they were calling me a girl and that upset me?"

See?  We get to judge men when they are "teased", or "afraid of something innocuous", but try to apply this to women and you will be promptly branded as sexist.

Again, perhaps you could take this experience and perspectives you have and use it to try and relate to our experiences.

We all suffer from this societal bullshit. But you seem determined to make yourself a victim and women perpetrators of injustice.

You and I are longstanding members of the same community, we've chatted for YEARS. Why can't you try and relate to women like me as human beings?

I'm trying hard to understand your frustrations. Why are you determined to paint people like me as unreasonable?

Again, what have I done in the many years we've participated here together to deserve such rude disregard from you?

[GuitarStv]

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.  This will be called victim-blaming or something, and there's definitely a physical power discrepancy between men and women, but the double standard of "I'm going to wear what I like and it's everyone else's problem" is a pretty unsophisticated philosophy.

What exactly is 'sexually desirable' dress for a woman, and how does it differ than 'sexually desirable' dress for a man?

When I try to answer that question, I'm thinking of tight clothing that shows off a lot of leg, boob, and maybe midriff for women . . . but stereotypical dress clothes for men (fitted dress pants, an ironed dress shirt, maybe a suit jacket).  A guy is free to wear speedos and a tank top, showing lots of skin - but this clothing doesn't seem to attract women - so men don't tend to do this.

It seems to me then that men are free to wear sexually desirable dress pretty much all the time (certainly all the time around the office) without being harassed, but women are not.  Is that incorrect?  If so, how?

[MudPuppy]

I've been saying more or less the same thing all along--that evolutionary psychology exists, and it causes gendered outcomes. 

The “nothin’ but mammals” argument doesn’t hold weight here. Animals shit outside because they are animals, but I expect decent members of society to use the toilets. No one (literally no one!) is talking about a passing glance because you noticed something. A split second departure of attention isn’t harassment. But you already know that don’t you? And yet you persist with “but I man, man wanna look at boobies.” Why is that?

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.

That just isn’t true. Men of all ages and attractiveness levels can (and do) make women feel uncomfortable when they do things like stare.

[Wrenchturner]

Here's my experience, since we're talking about lived experiences:

Working as a tradesman, all the apprentices were male except for one.  Out of a sample size of 60 or so.  All the workshop staff are male, around 40 or so.  There were grants available specifically for women getting into this as a trades-person.  All the salesmen are male, except for one woman who used to work in sales.  Maybe 15 people.  All the customer service staff, and most of the office staff, were women, approx. 15 or so. 
The men are competitive.  The ones in the shop like to fix stuff and not shave too often.  The physical demands are substantial.  The salesmen are extroverted and very competitive.  The women in the service roles are much better at empathy, perhaps that's partly just good old selection and not entirely gendered, but it's definitely a factor. 

[Metalcat]

Here's my experience, since we're talking about lived experiences:

Working as a tradesman, all the apprentices were male except for one.  Out of a sample size of 60 or so.  All the workshop staff are male, around 40 or so.  There were grants available specifically for women getting into this as a trades-person.  All the salesmen are male, except for one woman who used to work in sales.  Maybe 15 people.  All the customer service staff, and most of the office staff, were women, approx. 15 or so. 
The men are competitive.  The ones in the shop like to fix stuff and not shave too often.  The physical demands are substantial.  The salesmen are extroverted and very competitive.  The women in the service roles are much better at empathy, perhaps that's partly just good old selection and not entirely gendered, but it's definitely a factor.

And I worked in a viciously competitive, physically demanding field where everyone was aggressive as fuck, but it is rapidly being taken over by women because women in science are known for being willing to work a lot harder for the same outcomes because we aren't taken as seriously.

I recently managed a team of surgeons, mostly female, and the make surgeons were much gentler and less intense than the women.

There are gender differences in behaviour, they are forged by tons of factors.

I'm personally known in my industry as being one of the hardest, nastiest Bulldogs out there. I once hosted a major professional event where the consensus was that everyone was afraid of me.

Society pressures women to be gentle. Some of us go along with it, some of us rebel against it.

[OtherJen]

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.  This will be called victim-blaming or something, and there's definitely a physical power discrepancy between men and women, but the double standard of "I'm going to wear what I like and it's everyone else's problem" is a pretty unsophisticated philosophy.

What exactly is 'sexually desirable' dress for a woman, and how does it differ than 'sexually desirable' dress for a man?

When I try to answer that question, I'm thinking of tight clothing that shows off a lot of leg, boob, and maybe midriff for women . . . but stereotypical dress clothes for men (fitted dress pants, an ironed dress shirt, maybe a suit jacket).  A guy is free to wear speedos and a tank top, showing lots of skin - but this clothing doesn't seem to attract women - so men don't tend to do this.

It seems to me then that men are free to wear sexually desirable dress pretty much all the time (certainly all the time around the office) without being harassed, but women are not.  Is that incorrect?  If so, how?

Good point and good question.

I note, however, that "sexually desirable" dress for a woman varies so much that there's no way to get it right. When I was younger and still attending church, I was criticized for wearing a sundress that was nowhere near skin-tight, showed no cleavage, had wide enough straps to cover my bra, and a knee-length A-line skirt. However, it didn't cover my shoulders, which might have tempted men to sin. I was told not to wear shoes with clicky heels because men might hear them and know that a woman was walking nearby. Sometimes open-toed shoes or sandals are frowned on because of foot fetishes. Sometimes collarbones are bad.

[Cool Friend]

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.  This will be called victim-blaming or something, and there's definitely a physical power discrepancy between men and women, but the double standard of "I'm going to wear what I like and it's everyone else's problem" is a pretty unsophisticated philosophy.

What exactly is 'sexually desirable' dress for a woman, and how does it differ than 'sexually desirable' dress for a man?

When I try to answer that question, I'm thinking of tight clothing that shows off a lot of leg, boob, and maybe midriff for women . . . but stereotypical dress clothes for men (fitted dress pants, an ironed dress shirt, maybe a suit jacket).  A guy is free to wear speedos and a tank top, showing lots of skin - but this clothing doesn't seem to attract women - so men don't tend to do this.

It seems to me then that men are free to wear sexually desirable dress pretty much all the time (certainly all the time around the office) without being harassed, but women are not.  Is that incorrect?  If so, how?

Good point and good question.

I note, however, that "sexually desirable" dress for a woman varies so much that there's no way to get it right. When I was younger and still attending church, I was criticized for wearing a sundress that was nowhere near skin-tight, showed no cleavage, had wide enough straps to cover my bra, and a knee-length A-line skirt. However, it didn't cover my shoulders, which might have tempted men to sin. I was told not to wear shoes with clicky heels because men might hear them and know that a woman was walking nearby. Sometimes open-toed shoes or sandals are frowned on because of foot fetishes. Sometimes collarbones are bad.

You know what all these things have in common? These kinds of men won't take responsibility for their own sexuality.

[Wrenchturner]

We all suffer from this societal bullshit. But you seem determined to make yourself a victim and women perpetrators of injustice.

Women are definitely greater victims in this than men, for sure, and I'm not trying to claim victimhood, more like trying to illuminate the inconsistencies. 

You and I are longstanding members of the same community, we've chatted for YEARS. Why can't you try and relate to women like me as human beings?

I'm trying hard to understand your frustrations. Why are you determined to paint people like me as unreasonable?

Again, what have I done in the many years we've participated here together to deserve such rude disregard from you?

I think you're reading a hostility here that I don't intend.  I have enjoyed our exchanges in the past and I find your comments to be insightful generally.

A couple things, so maybe we can tease this out:
you've had some serious battles with sexism in your career and personal life.  I think you're a lot older than me, so it could be the change in culture that puts us on either side--your experience is something akin to suffrage/emancipation, whereas my experience is something akin to social science masturbation and a perpetual insistence on ignoring gendered differences... we are on either end of a shift in cultural perception.  Two ends of a swinging pendulum.

It also appears--if I were to summarize-- that you don't like the male-masculine, female-feminine characterizations, since you have expressed masculine-attributed characteristics yourself and that that is a trend in your family.

So there's something interesting there, for sure, since men do have non-masculine traits and vice versa.  But I believe the general categorizations have value.

[Metalcat]

We all suffer from this societal bullshit. But you seem determined to make yourself a victim and women perpetrators of injustice.

Women are definitely greater victims in this than men, for sure, and I'm not trying to claim victimhood, more like trying to illuminate the inconsistencies. 

You and I are longstanding members of the same community, we've chatted for YEARS. Why can't you try and relate to women like me as human beings?

I'm trying hard to understand your frustrations. Why are you determined to paint people like me as unreasonable?

Again, what have I done in the many years we've participated here together to deserve such rude disregard from you?

I think you're reading a hostility here that I don't intend.  I have enjoyed our exchanges in the past and I find your comments to be insightful generally.

A couple things, so maybe we can tease this out:
you've had some serious battles with sexism in your career and personal life.  I think you're a lot older than me, so it could be the change in culture that puts us on either side--your experience is something akin to suffrage/emancipation, whereas my experience is something akin to social science masturbation and a perpetual insistence on ignoring gendered differences... we are on either end of a shift in cultural perception.  Two ends of a swinging pendulum.

It also appears--if I were to summarize-- that you don't like the male-masculine, female-feminine characterizations, since you have expressed masculine-attributed characteristics yourself and that that is a trend in your family.

So there's something interesting there, for sure, since men do have non-masculine traits and vice versa.  But I believe the general categorizations have value.

I'm 38.

I've found your posts blatantly hurtful.

ETA: I've also never said anything about denying the differences between men and women. Never. I said that the factors behind the differences are complex.

[MudPuppy]

@Tyler durden it’s okay to seek to learn more about things. What will you do with the responses you’ve received? How will this information affect your future behaviors?

Well, I refined my question a little. So its more of what Malcat was saying. Its OK to notice, just dont stare. That would be the same view I hold.

Then your view is similar to my own. Noticing something (like a stain on a tie, for instance) is fine. It’s inappropriate to stare that the coffee stain. Michael in accounts receivable didn’t order order that coffee to catch your attention, any more than Erica in payroll wore a v neck to attract someone.

I’m glad to hear that being a parent is helping you learn more about yourself. It’s good that you aren’t assuming that simply having a mother/sister/daughter makes you immune to negative behaviors toward/about women.

[dreadmoose]

I applaud the efforts of the people still trying to discuss this or enlighten those that seem to lack the ability to look beyond themselves here.

If your industry completely lacks any female representation then I'd posit that those in power there are the problem. With the attitudes shown here, who in their right mind would be the first woman to join a group that will publicly post about how sexist they are? It's signing up for a life-long fight and a serious risk of sexual harassment / assault.

There are not two sides to the pendulum, there is no new age of men, nor a shift in cultural perception that has removed sexism. What you call social science masturbation is good ol' fashioned sexism. You don't feel the weight of it because you are not the group being oppressed. And it's becoming quite clear you are unwilling to learn from those that do have to deal with this.

Sadly this means you've decided to oppress rather than help cause the shift in cultural perception and adopt proper practices. It's rare that someone fully accepts what they're doing is bad, so the rationalizations on your side are normal, and what people did during actual woman's suffrage too.

[Sailor Sam]

I work in a male dominated industry, and interact frequently with very young men who are still forging their adult identities. I also just genuinely like dudes, and am friends with many fully adult men. As a demographic, dudes are good people, a V-taper is nice to look at, and sometimes they smell quite good.

Based on all that mostly good-willed observation, I’ve come up with a personal theory on the overarching issue that a certain demographic of men are struggling with. That of becoming a demographic.

Before the latest cultural revolution, a certain subset of men were the standard. They weren’t talked about as a group. They were not judged as a group. Unlike women, minorities, Muslims, Asians, LGBTQ+ people, etc, etc, the men in this subset never learned the ability to endure being talked about, judged, or studied, as a demographic. A certain subset within that subset do not like, and rail against being being discussed and judged as a group. Some beg to reassured that they’re still seen as ‘a good guy,’ ie: as an individual, outside the demographic. Some get angry over the supposed “injustice” of being grouped.

The supposed psychological argument is horrific bullshit. I could type up all kinds of personal feelings and observations, but eh, it won’t do any good in changing those who ascribe to said horrific bullshit, so I will refrain from wasting my typing energy. Those who see the bullshit can nod a little nod of exasperated solidarity.

[Metalcat]

I applaud the efforts of the people still trying to discuss this or enlighten those that seem to lack the ability to look beyond themselves here.

If your industry completely lacks any female representation then I'd posit that those in power there are the problem. With the attitudes shown here, who in their right mind would be the first woman to join a group that will publicly post about how sexist they are? It's signing up for a life-long fight and a serious risk of sexual harassment / assault.

There are not two sides to the pendulum, there is no new age of men, nor a shift in cultural perception that has removed sexism. What you call social science masturbation is good ol' fashioned sexism. You don't feel the weight of it because you are not the group being oppressed. And it's becoming quite clear you are unwilling to learn from those that do have to deal with this.

Sadly this means you've decided to oppress rather than help cause the shift in cultural perception and adopt proper practices. It's rare that someone fully accepts what they're doing is bad, so the rationalizations on your side are normal, and what people did during actual woman's suffrage too.

I normally don't jump in to these debates too extensively, but I felt like I was being dismissed and insulted by members of my own community.

I'm a known community member who has participated here daily for many years. I consider many regular posters to be my friends.

I'm not talking to strangers on the internet, I'm talking to people who I spend more time with than most of my IRL friends.

[Wrenchturner]

My apologies Malcat, for some reason I thought you were older.  As for the perceived insult; I will remain civil, but I cannot apologize for things I believe unless I am prepared to unbelieve them.

Dreadmoose, you should read my posts more carefully.  My industry has lots of women, but few of them turn wrenches in the workshop.

[Metalcat]

My apologies Malcat, for some reason I thought you were older.  As for the perceived insult; I will remain civil, but I cannot apologize for things I believe unless I am prepared to unbelieve them.

Dreadmoose, you should read my posts more carefully.  My industry has lots of women, but few of them turn wrenches in the workshop.

I don't expect an apology. You are entitled to your opinions.
I wanted it known that I find them hurtful and offensive. That doesn't mean you owe me anything if you don't feel you do.

I offend plenty of people and don't feel I owe them anything.

[Watchmaker]

A couple things, so maybe we can tease this out:
you've had some serious battles with sexism in your career and personal life.  I think you're a lot older than me, so it could be the change in culture that puts us on either side--your experience is something akin to suffrage/emancipation, whereas my experience is something akin to social science masturbation and a perpetual insistence on ignoring gendered differences... we are on either end of a shift in cultural perception.  Two ends of a swinging pendulum.

Alternatively one could posit that Malcat has been forced to live through constant sexism and therefore has no illusions about how bad it often is, whereas you have been blithely unware of the sexism all around you (including in your lived experience described above) and deaf to the testimony of Malcat and others. This is not a generational difference between 38 year-olds and how ever old you are. This is you not understanding what other people are living through. 

[dreadmoose]

@Malcat

I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts in many of the threads I follow and have found your half of the discussion here very insightful. I'm sorry for how my posts have stirred the pot and caused friends to become less than civil to you. I can't imagine how the world feels when people continue to push a narrative that some aren't welcome as I usually fit into their definition of some. They are wrong and will hopefully figure it out soon enough.

I have discussed points brought up here with my wife about how to define toxic masculinity, what can be done, and where we can help change things for our children. If nothing else I hope this thread can help others understand how much work there is left, and that even standing on the sidelines is contributing to harm.

@Wrenchturner you've made it obvious you won't follow other people's points of view. I wish you maturity with age and hope you'll come around to at least stop oppressing or thinking less of people based on social constructs (and the misunderstanding that it's actual science or genetics). Changing the umbrella definition of industry that you're talking about misses the point in the lack of female representation in any position, and if you won't help build a space that people can be safe and be themselves I hope others in your industry do it for you. We only benefit from more points of view, and the oppression of those is holding back our entire species.

[Wrenchturner]

A couple things, so maybe we can tease this out:
you've had some serious battles with sexism in your career and personal life.  I think you're a lot older than me, so it could be the change in culture that puts us on either side--your experience is something akin to suffrage/emancipation, whereas my experience is something akin to social science masturbation and a perpetual insistence on ignoring gendered differences... we are on either end of a shift in cultural perception.  Two ends of a swinging pendulum.

Alternatively one could posit that Malcat has been forced to live through constant sexism and therefore has no illusions about how bad it often is, whereas you have been blithely unware of the sexism all around you (including in your lived experience described above) and deaf to the testimony of Malcat and others. This is not a generational difference between 38 year-olds and how ever old you are. This is you not understanding what other people are living through.

The age hypothesis was obviously wrong.  But the arguments in this thread have been more mixed than you suggest.

[wenchsenior]

Later in life I developed an interest in boxing, wrestling, and martial arts as a way of developing more confidence and have been able to a large degree to work out many of the issues arising from this.  I still have some habits that are very deeply ingrained, one is stepping back if someone quickly comes within a few feet of me, one is backing off if someone speaks unexpectedly loudly, and one of them is a strong aversion to staring directly into someone's eyes - particularly if this is someone I do not know very well or someone who is physically larger than me.  This happens more often with men, but occasionally with women as well.  There is a part of my brain that expects immediate physical altercation from staring at someone's eyes.  I'm not looking for and don't expect sympathy - this is my problem.  As mentioned, I have realized that this is something that can easily be misconstrued and have been working on fixing it for a long time.  But truly sometimes things are not as simple as "You're an adult, just stop looking at people's chests when you talk to them".

I sympathize with your history, my own is a bit similar (though less extreme). There are plenty of other places to look then people's chests though. Personally, I tend to turn 45 degrees away from people when I'm talking to them and stare off into space because I don't particularly like eye contact either.

Somewhat similar history of being bullied for years as a kid, and this is what I do as well, if I don't know someone well or I'm trying to signal that I want an end to the conversation. Though I'm female and chest-staring (while rude) would not as easily be misconstrued were I to do it. Just turn your body a bit to the side. You can still stare at 'chest height' but you won't be staring at the actual chest.

[Watchmaker]

Before the latest cultural revolution, a certain subset of men were the standard. They weren’t talked about as a group. They were not judged as a group. Unlike women, minorities, Muslims, Asians, LGBTQ+ people, etc, etc, the men in this subset never learned the ability to endure being talked about, judged, or studied, as a demographic. A certain subset within that subset do not like, and rail against being being discussed and judged as a group. Some beg to reassured that they’re still seen as ‘a good guy,’ ie: as an individual, outside the demographic. Some get angry over the supposed “injustice” of being grouped.

I had never thought of it that way, but I think you're on to something there.

[Tyler durden]

@Tyler durden it’s okay to seek to learn more about things. What will you do with the responses you’ve received? How will this information affect your future behaviors?

Well, I refined my question a little. So its more of what Malcat was saying. Its OK to notice, just dont stare. That would be the same view I hold.

Then your view is similar to my own. Noticing something (like a stain on a tie, for instance) is fine. It’s inappropriate to stare that the coffee stain. Michael in accounts receivable didn’t order order that coffee to catch your attention, any more than Erica in payroll wore a v neck to attract someone.

I’m glad to hear that being a parent is helping you learn more about yourself. It’s good that you aren’t assuming that simply having a mother/sister/daughter makes you immune to negative behaviors toward/about women.

Thanks. And on the last part you couldnt be more right. My wife and I work in the same field. While she hasn't had to deal with much outright sexism in the way its being discussed here what she does experience is enough to want to make me explode. Getting passed over for promotions, not being invited out to golf outings, not being invited out for drinks. I could go on and on. And to be fair its not all the guys she works with, but the worst of it, is that it was her old boss. And that was really eye opening for me to see that first/second hand.

I think a lot of the solutions to those problems we are seeing implemented or encouraged today are just so backwards and wrong. But, doing nothing isn't an option either.

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

[Watchmaker]

But the arguments in this thread have been more mixed than you suggest.

Apologies, I don't understand what this means, could you expand on this?

[OtherJen]

@Tyler durden it’s okay to seek to learn more about things. What will you do with the responses you’ve received? How will this information affect your future behaviors?

Well, I refined my question a little. So its more of what Malcat was saying. Its OK to notice, just dont stare. That would be the same view I hold.

Then your view is similar to my own. Noticing something (like a stain on a tie, for instance) is fine. It’s inappropriate to stare that the coffee stain. Michael in accounts receivable didn’t order order that coffee to catch your attention, any more than Erica in payroll wore a v neck to attract someone.

I’m glad to hear that being a parent is helping you learn more about yourself. It’s good that you aren’t assuming that simply having a mother/sister/daughter makes you immune to negative behaviors toward/about women.

Thanks. And on the last part you couldnt be more right. My wife and I work in the same field. While she hasn't had to deal with much outright sexism in the way its being discussed here what she does experience is enough to want to make me explode. Getting passed over for promotions, not being invited out to golf outings, not being invited out for drinks. I could go on and on. And to be fair its not all the guys she works with, but the worst of it, is that it was her old boss. And that was really eye opening for me to see that first/second hand.

I think a lot of the solutions to those problems we are seeing implemented or encouraged today are just so backwards and wrong. But, doing nothing isn't an option either.

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

You're right. So much career advancement comes from networking, but you have to be able to participate in said networking. If you're excluded, you're automatically at a disadvantage. I don't know what is to be done either.

[MudPuppy]

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

It’s not weird to invite your shiftmates out to a post dinner round of drinks! It would be weird to invite yourself to someone else’s gathering (weird regardless of the sex/gender mix) or to only invite a that one coworker you only kind of know over and over and never accept or initiate any other invites OR invite a group and be unusually upset that a particular coworker declines, that would warrant some self examination.


Edit: one be thing that can go a long way toward changing the culture around a lot of things is for not just the group that experiences the issue to speak out, but also for those who benefit from the issue to speak out.

As a personal example, one of my colleagues regularly speaks up for me in mixed discipline meetings when the person in the leadership role of our section (who displays obvious disdain toward certain disciplines, younger age groups, and certain other demographics) when I bring forth an idea or issue and am dismissed or told it won’t work. They will bring up the idea and when it is endorsed they say that it was my idea, etc that I had mentioned previously and they agree with me. Or sometimes they will simply interject and ask WHY my contribution wasn’t accepted, and say they believe in me/my contribution. It has gone a long long way toward improving our sections’ function and the entire group’s trust.

Another way to do this is when you see or hear another guy donor say something inappropriate or off color, to outright say that it isn’t okay! You can also ask them why that joke is funny or that topic was appropriate at work, or why they think that doing xyz was acceptable.

Best of all, these are mustachian solutions, meaning they would cost you nothing!

[shelivesthedream]

In my experience, women are pretty comfortable with sexual advances as long as you are sexually desireable as a male.  This will be called victim-blaming or something, and there's definitely a physical power discrepancy between men and women, but the double standard of "I'm going to wear what I like and it's everyone else's problem" is a pretty unsophisticated philosophy.

What exactly is 'sexually desirable' dress for a woman, and how does it differ than 'sexually desirable' dress for a man?

When I try to answer that question, I'm thinking of tight clothing that shows off a lot of leg, boob, and maybe midriff for women . . . but stereotypical dress clothes for men (fitted dress pants, an ironed dress shirt, maybe a suit jacket).  A guy is free to wear speedos and a tank top, showing lots of skin - but this clothing doesn't seem to attract women - so men don't tend to do this.

It seems to me then that men are free to wear sexually desirable dress pretty much all the time (certainly all the time around the office) without being harassed, but women are not.  Is that incorrect?  If so, how?

I don't think you're totally incorrect, but I think things have changed since about 2000 for men's clothing. It's been a long time since typical men's clothing showed off their body, though it has been the fashion at various points in history. Skintight Regency breeches, for example, or young Henry VIII in his hose and codpiece. For about a century, typical women's fashions have been much tighter and more revealing than men's. So "sexy" men's clothing was about signalling a demeanour rather than showing off their hunky bod. (Exceptions have applied, but I'm talking about general streetwear for those of an age where you could expect them to be single and looking.) Now we see young men in skinny jeans, "slim fit" suits where you can count their individual arse cheeks, etc.

We intend to ask our children to dress modestly. When I say that, people usually immediately get their knickers in a twist about how we're going to oppress our daughter. So back up and read it again. ASK. OUR CHILDREN. If I'm buying the clothes, I get final say, so that's easy. At some point we'll give them a clothing budget and let them choose. At that point we'll define some absolute parameters whereby I will confiscate stuff - I think no offensive words or pictures and no visible underwear are the minimum, but we'll see how things are when we get there - but also ask that they consider their clothing choices within the context of the culture we live in, consider what they want their clothes to say about them, and choose thoughtfully rather than just buying whatever. Obviously my hope is that they will have a similar philosophy around clothing that we parents have, but except for a few absolute rules what I really want is for them to think about their clothing outside just current fashion.

But the rules will be the same for our male children and our female children. No short shorts would mean no short shorts - boy or girl. Likewise no cleavage, no sleeveless tops - whatever the rules end up being, they will be family rules, not daughter rules. Yes, on average I expect our daughter to encounter more immodest clothing choices than our son, but that's a problem with the culture, not a problem with her as a female human.

ETA: I think Mr SLTD would prefer to have more official rules than I would, but I think I can talk him round over the next decade. I think the tricky bit to get right will be deciding what age certain things are allowed. Like, high heels, or different kinds of makeup. I would dearly love to LAY DOWN THE LAWWWW and say no one in our house is ever going to wear foundation (I remember girls at my school wearing it 24/7 and trashing their skin and looking like they'd been to the local plasterers it was that thick) but that'll presumably go down like a lead balloon so I'll have to have a bit more of a think about it... Thankfully it's illegal to tattoo anyone under 18 in the UK, so odds of them getting a dumbass tattoo are reduced if they have to think it over for multiple years rather than swinging by Claire's Accessories after school.

[Metalcat]

^ reminds me of how one of my friends kept an entire separate wardrobe at our other friend's place so that she could change after leaving the house in her modest clothes.

[former player]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

[OtherJen]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

[former player]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

The Catholic Church teaches its men that bare shoulders are a sexual signal?

[shelivesthedream]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

I was spitballing based on what the rules were at my school for non-uniform days and sixth formers. Other examples I could have chosen are "leggings are not trousers" and "no bare midriffs".(I still remember assemblies about cold kidneys!)  Our eldest is three, it's not been a big issue for us to think through thoroughly yet! If you read the post again (without getting lost on the way), you'll see that everything except "no offensive words or pictures and no visible underwear" were examples of potential additional rules that people think of as applying only to girls/women that, if we adopted, would apply to boys/men too. Key word: "would mean". Sorry if my post was unclear.

^ reminds me of how one of my friends kept an entire separate wardrobe at our other friend's place so that she could change after leaving the house in her modest clothes.

Lol, yeah. I think Mr SLTD is a leeeeeetle too optimistic about how successful clothing bans are on teenagers. And, I think, a little uncharitable about the capability of teenagers to make their own decisions about what to wear. Hence my attitude of asking that they consider their clothing thoughtfully beyond just the current fashion  rather than outright banning a ton of stuff.

[shelivesthedream]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

I'm not aware of any official Catholic teaching that gives specific rules about what people should wear in their day to day lives. Is there one? Churches (as in the buildings) can require that a dress code be followed in order to enter, but personally I have never seen a dress code required to attend a service in a regular church, only to enter a church as a tourist where the purpose is to remind people that this is a working sacred building and not a museum, and they are entering the house of God.

[OtherJen]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

I'm not aware of any official Catholic teaching that gives specific rules about what people should wear in their day to day lives. Is there one? Churches (as in the buildings) can require that a dress code be followed in order to enter, but personally I have never seen a dress code required to attend a service in a regular church, only to enter a church as a tourist where the purpose is to remind people that this is a working sacred building and not a museum, and they are entering the house of God.

Maybe it was a cultural thing. We had a lot of far-right-wing Charismatic Movement types in our area. I was scolded for wearing a sleeveless dress to Mass. Wedding dresses without shoulders covered were very strongly discouraged, no matter how conservatively cut they were otherwise.

[Metalcat]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

I'm not aware of any official Catholic teaching that gives specific rules about what people should wear in their day to day lives. Is there one? Churches (as in the buildings) can require that a dress code be followed in order to enter, but personally I have never seen a dress code required to attend a service in a regular church, only to enter a church as a tourist where the purpose is to remind people that this is a working sacred building and not a museum, and they are entering the house of God.

Maybe it was a cultural thing. We had a lot of far-right-wing Charismatic Movement types in our area. I was scolded for wearing a sleeveless dress to Mass. Wedding dresses without shoulders covered were very strongly discouraged, no matter how conservatively cut they were otherwise.

Man, I grew up in an artsy community that literally puts out a nude calendar of well known locals every year. They also have annual topless women's events. I did *not* grow up thinking that shoulders were sexual, or really anything about bodies actually.

[shelivesthedream]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

I'm not aware of any official Catholic teaching that gives specific rules about what people should wear in their day to day lives. Is there one? Churches (as in the buildings) can require that a dress code be followed in order to enter, but personally I have never seen a dress code required to attend a service in a regular church, only to enter a church as a tourist where the purpose is to remind people that this is a working sacred building and not a museum, and they are entering the house of God.

Maybe it was a cultural thing. We had a lot of far-right-wing Charismatic Movement types in our area. I was scolded for wearing a sleeveless dress to Mass. Wedding dresses without shoulders covered were very strongly discouraged, no matter how conservatively cut they were otherwise.

I'm sorry to hear that. It sounds awful.

You've reminded me, though, of something I think is really true when it comes to thinking about modesty and clothing and the whole "policing women's bodies" thing. It's from a CS Lewis book, although I may have smushed two bits together in my mind and am clearly not expressing it as eloquently as the original.

That people often think that modesty is entirely about the other person and how you are perceived by them, and that's why it's such a difficult topic. But that kind of modesty is totally cultural. You can be a modest bare-breasted women in some parts of the world and even showing an ankle could be immodest in some parts of British history.

But modesty is actually about your intention when you dress. Clothes being a form of communication as well as practical covering, you can't ignore the existence of other eyes and hence can't ignore your own culture. But the question is whether your intentions are to honour God or not, and that usually the most humble and least vain option is to blend in. So wearing a ball gown to the swimming pool can be as immodest as wearing a bikini to the office.

That's the kind of thought process I want my kids to go through: why am I choosing this clothing and is that a good choice for me? Thinking beyond "But all my friends are wearing it!" and sometimes making choices that I wouldn't, but at least having actually thought about it.

[Psychstache]

I think you lost me at "no sleeveless tops".  Are bare shoulders really such a sexual signal?

They were in the Catholic Church when I grew up and presumably still are.

I'm not aware of any official Catholic teaching that gives specific rules about what people should wear in their day to day lives. Is there one? Churches (as in the buildings) can require that a dress code be followed in order to enter, but personally I have never seen a dress code required to attend a service in a regular church, only to enter a church as a tourist where the purpose is to remind people that this is a working sacred building and not a museum, and they are entering the house of God.

Maybe it was a cultural thing. We had a lot of far-right-wing Charismatic Movement types in our area. I was scolded for wearing a sleeveless dress to Mass. Wedding dresses without shoulders covered were very strongly discouraged, no matter how conservatively cut they were otherwise.

I'm sorry to hear that. It sounds awful.

You've reminded me, though, of something I think is really true when it comes to thinking about modesty and clothing and the whole "policing women's bodies" thing. It's from a CS Lewis book, although I may have smushed two bits together in my mind and am clearly not expressing it as eloquently as the original.

That people often think that modesty is entirely about the other person and how you are perceived by them, and that's why it's such a difficult topic. But that kind of modesty is totally cultural. You can be a modest bare-breasted women in some parts of the world and even showing an ankle could be immodest in some parts of British history.

But modesty is actually about your intention when you dress. Clothes being a form of communication as well as practical covering, you can't ignore the existence of other eyes and hence can't ignore your own culture. But the question is whether your intentions are to honour God or not, and that usually the most humble and least vain option is to blend in. So wearing a ball gown to the swimming pool can be as immodest as wearing a bikini to the office.

That's the kind of thought process I want my kids to go through: why am I choosing this clothing and is that a good choice for me? Thinking beyond "But all my friends are wearing it!" and sometimes making choices that I wouldn't, but at least having actually thought about it.

Problem is, this is possibly the rational decision making heuristic for teenagers. Social ostracization is often seen as a fate worse than death (and quite frankly can contribute to actual death via suicide) and despite the fact that nearly everyone on this board leans towards being a contrarian there's no guarantee that their kids will have the same disposition that makes resisting peer pressure fairly easy.

[Chris22]

Honest question: is the policing of women’s outfits in church, etc, done by men or women?  I’m a man so obviously I don’t have a good perspective on this, but I have almost never heard a man complain about a woman’s outfit*, but I have heard plenty of women talk negatively about how other women are dressed.


*ive heard plenty of men say “hey did you see so-and-so and what she’s wearing today?  Wow” which I suppose is probably negative, but it was meant as a positive. I mean, they want people to think they look good right?  I dunno.

[MudPuppy]

Both! Patriarchal bullshit is insidious. The best way I can try to explain is by relating it to how patriarchy (via toxic masculinity) hurts men as well due to suppression of normal human emotion, etc.

[Metalcat]

Honest question: is the policing of women’s outfits in church, etc, done by men or women?  I’m a man so obviously I don’t have a good perspective on this, but I have almost never heard a man complain about a woman’s outfit*, but I have heard plenty of women talk negatively about how other women are dressed.


*ive heard plenty of men say “hey did you see so-and-so and what she’s wearing today?  Wow” which I suppose is probably negative, but it was meant as a positive. I mean, they want people to think they look good right?  I dunno.

Patriarchy and toxic masculinity are not just perpetrated by men. This is a huge misconception where men think they're specifically being criticized by women, when really, we're criticizing a system that damages everyone.

[Sandi_k]

I just wanna give a shoult-out of appreciation to @Malcat and @OtherJen for their patience. I could not manage it.

I have an entire cascade of thoughts, but I did want to comment on @shelivesthedream and the idea of modestly dressed children who "don't show their under garments."

I am a professional woman in my 50's, and the ONLY way I can avoid that is with turtlenecks and blazers.

If you let your son wear a V-neck, and your daughter wear a V-neck; or for either/both to wear tank tops on a summer day when it hits triple digits - the bra straps might slip into view at some point.

My niece is continually policed by her father about the slide of the shirt revealing a bra strap, and it is cringe-worthy to see. My heart breaks for her, because all he is doing is making his 14 year old kid ashamed of her body, and shy about clothing.

I think it's important to note that the sexualization of girls starts YOUNG. I was first touched without consent at age 11 - I was at a hotel, walking back to my room with my younger brother, and a passing adult male made sure to dangle his hand as he passed me so he could touch me. My junior high school science teacher grabbed my rear, and I slapped him. He claimed his hand "had slipped" and I retorted that "so did mine." I was 13.

I don't think men in general even *hear* these stories. My own spouse had not, until #MeToo hit high gear. He sees me as sassy and smart, and thought that mean I'd be respected in school and in the workplace. Sadly, being smart sometimes means that you are in situations where you're really alone. I have a friend who was raped on a work trip by a co-worker, and he claims he thought she "wanted him" because she agreed to a drink after the work dinner ended. He is awaiting sentencing, and it's taken *2* years, and everyone at work believing that she was "dumb enough to be alone with him in his hotel room" which meant she really wanted it, and now she's "recanted consent."

Please, please, please understand that these stories are real examples. And ask yourself how you would feel if the tables were turned. Every time you get a raise, whispers start that you must be sleeping with the boss. When you get a promotion, it's because the board finally decided it needed another woman in a "leadership position." Or you only got hired because of "quotas."

Honestly, I am surprised that more women don't become "burn it downers". The mansplaining, the condescension, the iron view that biology means destiny, that reality the emotional and homefront labor is borne by women disproportionately? It's exhausting, enraging, and ever-present. Telling us that it's not true, or so much better, or one non-replicable study says it's solved is weak. So stop it.

Maybe it's time to have a MsMoneyMustache, for women only? The FB group Women's Personal Finance (Women on FIRE) is a lovely oasis in that cesspool. Maybe we need another oasis with forums...

[former player]

ETA: Personally I find the title of this thread extremely insulting and if it said "what's wrong with women" I'd have my butt in an uproar. I haven't seem much disscussion about mental illness coupled with the other things that have been brought up such as a abusive and toxic upbringing, lack of social skills on how to handle failure (or perceived failures) etc to why SOME men (as well as some women here on the mean streets of LA with many women engaged in violent crime and behaviors) are violent.

While I would agree with "not all men" I don't have a problem with referring to men "in general".  Men, in general, are more likely to murder their female partners than the other way around.  Men, in general, are more likely to abuse their domestic partners.  Men, in general, are more likely to rape.  Men, in general, are more likely to sexually harass.  Men, in general, have more economic and social power and in general use that power in ways that perpetuate male power.

I've had more than 40 years of dealing with the patriarchy, starting with my schooldays when I was told I couldn't do a mechanics' course because there were limited places "and the boys need it more".  I joined a mostly male profession and at the age of 50 I could still be the only woman in a meeting of 20 men.  I posted above that only a day or two ago I was walking my dog on the beach and out of the blue came up against a sexist statement.  I no longer give a shit if men's feelings are hurt by a derogatory reference to men in general.

(I remember the start of legislating against sex discrimination in the 1970s.  For a long time I thought that boys who grew up to be men under that new norm would take equality for granted and act accordingly.  More fool me.)

[Watchmaker]

ETA: Personally I find the title of this thread extremely insulting and if it said "what's wrong with women" I'd have my butt in an uproar. I haven't seem much disscussion about mental illness coupled with the other things that have been brought up such as a abusive and toxic upbringing, lack of social skills on how to handle failure (or perceived failures) etc to why SOME men (as well as some women here on the mean streets of LA with many women engaged in violent crime and behaviors) are violent.

Speaking as a man, I have no problem with the thread title. When you have so many far-reaching, overlapping issues effecting the demographic I think it's fair to use that kind of label, particularly when the label is being self-applied.

[GuitarStv]

That people often think that modesty is entirely about the other person and how you are perceived by them, and that's why it's such a difficult topic. But that kind of modesty is totally cultural. You can be a modest bare-breasted women in some parts of the world and even showing an ankle could be immodest in some parts of British history.

But modesty is actually about your intention when you dress. Clothes being a form of communication as well as practical covering, you can't ignore the existence of other eyes and hence can't ignore your own culture. But the question is whether your intentions are to honour God or not, and that usually the most humble and least vain option is to blend in. So wearing a ball gown to the swimming pool can be as immodest as wearing a bikini to the office.

This is an interesting point.  Not just with clothing.  So often, we think of nudity as being sexual . . . but really they're not.  They're sexual only because culturally we have a long history of hiding our bodies.  This isn't the case in other societies.  In Japanese Shunga (porn from the 1600s) people having sex are almost always depicted with clothing on.  Due to the practice of everyone attending bath houses, public nudity was the norm.  Go to a nudist colony pretty much anywhere.  Or attend one of the world naked bike rides.  You're going to very quickly realize that there's nothing sexy at all about the naked human form.  :P

[ender]

I'm hesitant to even post in this thread.

But a few convos have caused me to want to finish a draft I had written for a while now.

Thanks. And on the last part you couldnt be more right. My wife and I work in the same field. While she hasn't had to deal with much outright sexism in the way its being discussed here what she does experience is enough to want to make me explode. Getting passed over for promotions, not being invited out to golf outings, not being invited out for drinks. I could go on and on. And to be fair its not all the guys she works with, but the worst of it, is that it was her old boss. And that was really eye opening for me to see that first/second hand.

I think a lot of the solutions to those problems we are seeing implemented or encouraged today are just so backwards and wrong. But, doing nothing isn't an option either.

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

I think a big part of the answer to "whats wrong with men?" question here relates to your story.

Many men (including some in this very thread), have a variant of "well I've never personally seen something, so it mustn't happen/be true" when it comes to the entire gender discussion.

I work in tech. Tech has massive issues with what you just said when it comes to gender parity. A lot of what's wrong with men, at least in tech, is not believing the actual systemic problems. Or worse, directly contributing.

I am a moderator on a CS careers discord. I often see people (always guys....) talking about "diversity hiring" and other variants on why men are better at tech than women. Tons of crap like this that's pretty overt. Luckily, I am empowered there to shut down, but it doesn't change the actual underlying attitudes/beliefs a surprisingly large number of people seem to overtly hold still. And it's unfortunately younger people too, which means culturally folks still are believing this.

There are enough blatant problems too which makes it so even if men accept the blatant crap, I think men on the whole do not realize all the subtle things which are problematic in tech leading to it being crappy for women. 

I don't think men in general even *hear* these stories. My own spouse had not, until #MeToo hit high gear. He sees me as sassy and smart, and thought that mean I'd be respected in school and in the workplace. Sadly, being smart sometimes means that you are in situations where you're really alone. I have a friend who was raped on a work trip by a co-worker, and he claims he thought she "wanted him" because she agreed to a drink after the work dinner ended. He is awaiting sentencing, and it's taken *2* years, and everyone at work believing that she was "dumb enough to be alone with him in his hotel room" which meant she really wanted it, and now she's "recanted consent."

Please, please, please understand that these stories are real examples. And ask yourself how you would feel if the tables were turned. Every time you get a raise, whispers start that you must be sleeping with the boss. When you get a promotion, it's because the board finally decided it needed another woman in a "leadership position." Or you only got hired because of "quotas."

Honestly, I am surprised that more women don't become "burn it downers". The mansplaining, the condescension, the iron view that biology means destiny, that reality the emotional and homefront labor is borne by women disproportionately? It's exhausting, enraging, and ever-present. Telling us that it's not true, or so much better, or one non-replicable study says it's solved is weak. So stop it.

+10000

[Kris]

I'm hesitant to even post in this thread.

But a few convos have caused me to want to finish a draft I had written for a while now.

Thanks. And on the last part you couldnt be more right. My wife and I work in the same field. While she hasn't had to deal with much outright sexism in the way its being discussed here what she does experience is enough to want to make me explode. Getting passed over for promotions, not being invited out to golf outings, not being invited out for drinks. I could go on and on. And to be fair its not all the guys she works with, but the worst of it, is that it was her old boss. And that was really eye opening for me to see that first/second hand.

I think a lot of the solutions to those problems we are seeing implemented or encouraged today are just so backwards and wrong. But, doing nothing isn't an option either.

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

I think a big part of the answer to "whats wrong with men?" question here relates to your story.

Many men (including some in this very thread), have a variant of "well I've never personally seen something, so it mustn't happen/be true" when it comes to the entire gender discussion.

I work in tech. Tech has massive issues with what you just said when it comes to gender parity. A lot of what's wrong with men, at least in tech, is not believing the actual systemic problems. Or worse, directly contributing.

I am a moderator on a CS careers discord. I often see people (always guys....) talking about "diversity hiring" and other variants on why men are better at tech than women. Tons of crap like this that's pretty overt. Luckily, I am empowered there to shut down, but it doesn't change the actual underlying attitudes/beliefs a surprisingly large number of people seem to overtly hold still. And it's unfortunately younger people too, which means culturally folks still are believing this.

There are enough blatant problems too which makes it so even if men accept the blatant crap, I think men on the whole do not realize all the subtle things which are problematic in tech leading to it being crappy for women. 

I don't think men in general even *hear* these stories. My own spouse had not, until #MeToo hit high gear. He sees me as sassy and smart, and thought that mean I'd be respected in school and in the workplace. Sadly, being smart sometimes means that you are in situations where you're really alone. I have a friend who was raped on a work trip by a co-worker, and he claims he thought she "wanted him" because she agreed to a drink after the work dinner ended. He is awaiting sentencing, and it's taken *2* years, and everyone at work believing that she was "dumb enough to be alone with him in his hotel room" which meant she really wanted it, and now she's "recanted consent."

Please, please, please understand that these stories are real examples. And ask yourself how you would feel if the tables were turned. Every time you get a raise, whispers start that you must be sleeping with the boss. When you get a promotion, it's because the board finally decided it needed another woman in a "leadership position." Or you only got hired because of "quotas."

Honestly, I am surprised that more women don't become "burn it downers". The mansplaining, the condescension, the iron view that biology means destiny, that reality the emotional and homefront labor is borne by women disproportionately? It's exhausting, enraging, and ever-present. Telling us that it's not true, or so much better, or one non-replicable study says it's solved is weak. So stop it.

+10000

Thank you.

[Metalcat]

I'm hesitant to even post in this thread.

But a few convos have caused me to want to finish a draft I had written for a while now.

Thanks. And on the last part you couldnt be more right. My wife and I work in the same field. While she hasn't had to deal with much outright sexism in the way its being discussed here what she does experience is enough to want to make me explode. Getting passed over for promotions, not being invited out to golf outings, not being invited out for drinks. I could go on and on. And to be fair its not all the guys she works with, but the worst of it, is that it was her old boss. And that was really eye opening for me to see that first/second hand.

I think a lot of the solutions to those problems we are seeing implemented or encouraged today are just so backwards and wrong. But, doing nothing isn't an option either.

I certainly cant say exactly what should be done. i think sometimes things just work out a certain way do to human nature. Would I be invited out if i was a male nurse to join a bunch of female nurses for drinks after work? maybe maybe not. im not sure what it would mean if i wasn't. Maybe having a male in the mix would just throw off the vibe... that isn't terrible its just honest. It goes the other way too. I dont know. Good discussion though.

I think a big part of the answer to "whats wrong with men?" question here relates to your story.

Many men (including some in this very thread), have a variant of "well I've never personally seen something, so it mustn't happen/be true" when it comes to the entire gender discussion.

I work in tech. Tech has massive issues with what you just said when it comes to gender parity. A lot of what's wrong with men, at least in tech, is not believing the actual systemic problems. Or worse, directly contributing.

I am a moderator on a CS careers discord. I often see people (always guys....) talking about "diversity hiring" and other variants on why men are better at tech than women. Tons of crap like this that's pretty overt. Luckily, I am empowered there to shut down, but it doesn't change the actual underlying attitudes/beliefs a surprisingly large number of people seem to overtly hold still. And it's unfortunately younger people too, which means culturally folks still are believing this.

There are enough blatant problems too which makes it so even if men accept the blatant crap, I think men on the whole do not realize all the subtle things which are problematic in tech leading to it being crappy for women. 

I don't think men in general even *hear* these stories. My own spouse had not, until #MeToo hit high gear. He sees me as sassy and smart, and thought that mean I'd be respected in school and in the workplace. Sadly, being smart sometimes means that you are in situations where you're really alone. I have a friend who was raped on a work trip by a co-worker, and he claims he thought she "wanted him" because she agreed to a drink after the work dinner ended. He is awaiting sentencing, and it's taken *2* years, and everyone at work believing that she was "dumb enough to be alone with him in his hotel room" which meant she really wanted it, and now she's "recanted consent."

Please, please, please understand that these stories are real examples. And ask yourself how you would feel if the tables were turned. Every time you get a raise, whispers start that you must be sleeping with the boss. When you get a promotion, it's because the board finally decided it needed another woman in a "leadership position." Or you only got hired because of "quotas."

Honestly, I am surprised that more women don't become "burn it downers". The mansplaining, the condescension, the iron view that biology means destiny, that reality the emotional and homefront labor is borne by women disproportionately? It's exhausting, enraging, and ever-present. Telling us that it's not true, or so much better, or one non-replicable study says it's solved is weak. So stop it.

+10000

Yep.

I'm always blown away by how in the dark men usually are about what women experience. They assume because they don't hear about it that it's never happened to their loved ones.

I have 4 brothers, 2 fathers, and a pile of male relatives, and until #MeToo, none of them had a clue what any of the women in my family have experienced.

It's not that we necessarily hide it from them, or that it's always so hard to talk about. Quite the opposite a lot of the time, it's more that it's such a common and *normal* part of female existence, that there often isn't really a strong impetus to talk about it.

We'll sometimes talk amongst ourselves, but it's more just a given that this shit happens. It's kind of like our periods. The vast majority of the time, we don't really talk about them in detail unless we have a reason to.

I knew I never talked much to the men close to me about this shit, but I somehow didn't assume they were clueless. Again, it's just sooooo normal, I couldn't fathom them being in the dark, but they were!

It's like when I dropped a bomb on the executive team of my doctoral program that they had a rampant sexual harrassment problem that had gone on for decades. The largely male faculty were shocked, but the largely female staff knew it was an open secret.

When I started talking to my trusted male faculty members about it, I couldn't believe it, but they had no idea that these men they worked closely with for decades had been pulling this shit of holding power over very young female students to eventually convince them into sex. I was gobsmacked, I was like "how did I know this within a month of joining the program, but you had no idea after 25 years???"

What I often say to men now is: The chances that no one you love is hiding from you that they've been violated are slim to none. Probability is that someone you love is not telling you about something very, very bad that happened to them. It's also shockingly improbable that none of the men you are close to have ever violated someone.

FTR, the profs who were coercing/manipulating/grooming young students into sex were the most popular, well liked profs, who had all won awards for excellence in teaching, and were famed for their humanitarian work. Pillars of the mutherfucking community. Great all round guys except for that whole being sexual predators thing.

[StarBright]

Honestly, I am surprised that more women don't become "burn it downers". The mansplaining, the condescension, the iron view that biology means destiny, that reality the emotional and homefront labor is borne by women disproportionately? It's exhausting, enraging, and ever-present. Telling us that it's not true, or so much better, or one non-replicable study says it's solved is weak. So stop it.

This made me laugh! 2020/2021 is the year that I have leaned into art about female rage. I have started responding to so many digital interactions with the Mad Men/Joan Burn This Place Down GIF. Burn this place down has become my default response.

I've worked in tech for almost 15 years now and for five of those years I was the only woman at my company. The combination of objectification, emotional punching bag, and expectation of mothering (as I've aged out of "girl to hit on" and into mom age) is wild and exhausting.

Maybe it just takes time and exhaustion for us to get to this stage?

[Laura33]

I'm always blown away by how in the dark men usually are about what women experience. They assume because they don't hear about it that it's never happened to their loved ones.

I have 4 brothers, 2 fathers, and a pile of male relatives, and until #MeToo, none of them had a clue what any of the women in my family have experienced.

It's not that we necessarily hide it from them, or that it's always so hard to talk about. Quite the opposite a lot of the time, it's more that it's such a common and *normal* part of female existence, that there often isn't really a strong impetus to talk about it.

We'll sometimes talk amongst ourselves, but it's more just a given that this shit happens. It's kind of like our periods. The vast majority of the time, we don't really talk about them in detail unless we have a reason to.

I saw this change happen in real time with my dad.  I remember as a baby lawyer at one point arguing with him about how damaging it was to have things like all-male country clubs where the guys could go and make the relationships and such, and he was arguing strongly about right to free association and all that (he was very much a Reagan Republican).  He also thought the "numbers" problem with women in positions of authority would solve itself as more women entered the pipeline.  Several years later, he watched his wife get totally fucked over on her promotion.  The company literally sent her to the other side of the world, because she "needed more operational experience" to get the top job; her boss intended to retire in 5 years, and she was directly and expressly told that she was his #2, and that when she came back in 5 years, she'd get the job.  Then, 2-3 years later, they reorganized and put 6 old white guys who had never even left HQ in line for the job.  She said fuck you, retired, and found another company that would give her the top job.  And suddenly my dad was the world's biggest feminist.

I feel compelled to weigh in, yet again, on the "there are so few women in these kinds of jobs it must be something innately biological" point.  And I'd like to try to do so with something more constructive than an eyeroll or cursing, so I will constrain my immediate reaction.  So what I'd like to say is that the good news is that women now have choices, and the result of that is that the "best and the brightest" often make choices that do not subject them to never-ending harassment and bullshit.

When I was in college, I was split between being an English major and a Chemistry major -- totally loved them both, was equally talented at both (data points:  5 on the AP Chem exam, before we had actual AP classes; SAT math equal to SAT verbal).  In the same semester, I had a chem class with a professor who had never given an A to a girl*, and an English professor who was hugely supportive.  I spent all semester battling the chem professor, who ultimately gave me an ulcer and a B.  That same semester, the English semester took me aside to tell me that my version of a poem imitating an author was so powerful I should really send it to the poet.  Guess which major I chose? 

Did it hurt me financially?  Fuck no.  I went to law school and am a partner in a law firm and can make as much money as I want.  Because I'm fucking smart and fucking ambitious and was absolutely committed to never being poor again.  And, luckily, I was also socially clueless to the point of not realizing when I should have been nicer or quieter, or that someone was hitting on me; I was also egotistical enough to look for new jobs when my bosses didn't appreciate me. 

So you can look at the data points of my story and say, see, girls just aren't into STEM as much as boys are -- they try it, they get lower grades, and they drop out for something easier.  Or you can look behind the census data and say here's one way the sciences are losing some of our best and brightest -- the very people we're supposedly trying to attract.  When women have choices, sometimes it takes just one asshole for smart, talented women to say fuck you, I don't deserve this shit, I'm gonna go somewhere where I'm appreciated.

Or you can say, well, that was the past, and all those problems have gone away now, so if there's still a discrepancy, it must be biology.  And this is where I insert my massive eyeroll and give up. 

*Guy's name was Richard -- call him Richard Smith.  The saying among all women on campus who had ever taken his class was "Dick Smith before he dicks you." 

[Kris]

I'm always blown away by how in the dark men usually are about what women experience. They assume because they don't hear about it that it's never happened to their loved ones.

I have 4 brothers, 2 fathers, and a pile of male relatives, and until #MeToo, none of them had a clue what any of the women in my family have experienced.

It's not that we necessarily hide it from them, or that it's always so hard to talk about. Quite the opposite a lot of the time, it's more that it's such a common and *normal* part of female existence, that there often isn't really a strong impetus to talk about it.

We'll sometimes talk amongst ourselves, but it's more just a given that this shit happens. It's kind of like our periods. The vast majority of the time, we don't really talk about them in detail unless we have a reason to.

I saw this change happen in real time with my dad.  I remember as a baby lawyer at one point arguing with him about how damaging it was to have things like all-male country clubs where the guys could go and make the relationships and such, and he was arguing strongly about right to free association and all that (he was very much a Reagan Republican).  He also thought the "numbers" problem with women in positions of authority would solve itself as more women entered the pipeline.  Several years later, he watched his wife get totally fucked over on her promotion.  The company literally sent her to the other side of the world, because she "needed more operational experience" to get the top job; her boss intended to retire in 5 years, and she was directly and expressly told that she was his #2, and that when she came back in 5 years, she'd get the job.  Then, 2-3 years later, they reorganized and put 6 old white guys who had never even left HQ in line for the job.  She said fuck you, retired, and found another company that would give her the top job.  And suddenly my dad was the world's biggest feminist.

I feel compelled to weigh in, yet again, on the "there are so few women in these kinds of jobs it must be something innately biological" point.  And I'd like to try to do so with something more constructive than an eyeroll or cursing, so I will constrain my immediate reaction.  So what I'd like to say is that the good news is that women now have choices, and the result of that is that the "best and the brightest" often make choices that do not subject them to never-ending harassment and bullshit.

When I was in college, I was split between being an English major and a Chemistry major -- totally loved them both, was equally talented at both (data points:  5 on the AP Chem exam, before we had actual AP classes; SAT math equal to SAT verbal).  In the same semester, I had a chem class with a professor who had never given an A to a girl*, and an English professor who was hugely supportive.  I spent all semester battling the chem professor, who ultimately gave me an ulcer and a B.  That same semester, the English semester took me aside to tell me that my version of a poem imitating an author was so powerful I should really send it to the poet.  Guess which major I chose? 

Did it hurt me financially?  Fuck no.  I went to law school and am a partner in a law firm and can make as much money as I want.  Because I'm fucking smart and fucking ambitious and was absolutely committed to never being poor again.  And, luckily, I was also socially clueless to the point of not realizing when I should have been nicer or quieter, or that someone was hitting on me; I was also egotistical enough to look for new jobs when my bosses didn't appreciate me. 

So you can look at the data points of my story and say, see, girls just aren't into STEM as much as boys are -- they try it, they get lower grades, and they drop out for something easier.  Or you can look behind the census data and say here's one way the sciences are losing some of our best and brightest -- the very people we're supposedly trying to attract.  When women have choices, sometimes it takes just one asshole for smart, talented women to say fuck you, I don't deserve this shit, I'm gonna go somewhere where I'm appreciated.

Or you can say, well, that was the past, and all those problems have gone away now, so if there's still a discrepancy, it must be biology.  And this is where I insert my massive eyeroll and give up. 

*Guy's name was Richard -- call him Richard Smith.  The saying among all women on campus who had ever taken his class was "Dick Smith before he dicks you."

Yep.

I was equally good at math and English. And then once I got to high school, I had a series of condescending and sexist male math teachers -- including one whose son was in my grade, and both of them disliked that I outperformed said son in the math class he was teaching (and got a higher math score on the ACT).

That was the end of my math career.