Does anyone else agree with feminism?

Post Reply New Topic

Have you ever really had a woman try to hit you (not in jest) for holding a door? I've always thought it's a matter of logistics: if you reach the door in such a way that it opens towards you, you hold it for the people behind you regardless of gender. If you're going through and someone else is a few steps away from holding the same door, you hold it so it doesn't swing shut on them regardless of gender. Right?

Can't read any of it, but you might note that the chart on the upper right seems to support what I said: Men are doing better than they were at the beginning, but women have gained so much that they now surpass them quite a bit (If my understanding of 'mens' and 'kanner' is correct).

see above. Men have gained; women have gained more.

meaningless to me, sorry.

relevant:
Mill's commentary, still appallingly relevant to the present understanding of gender differences:
"Neither does it avail anything to say that the nature of the two sexes adapts them to their present functions and position, and renders these appropriate to them. Standing on the ground of common sense and the constitution of the human mind, I deny that anyone knows, or can know, the nature of the two sexes, as long as they have only been seen in their present relation to one another. If men had ever been found in society without women, or women without men, or if there had been a society of men and women in which the women were not under the control of the men, something might have been positively known about the mental and moral differences which may be inherent in the nature of each. What is now called the nature of women is an eminently artificial thing -- the result of forced repression in some directions, unnatural stimulation in others. It may be asserted without scruple, that no other class of dependents have had their character so entirely distorted from its natural proportions by their relation with their masters; for, if conquered and slave races have been, in some respects, more forcibly repressed, whatever in them has not been crushed down by an iron heel has generally been let alone, and if left with any liberty of development, it has developed itself according to its own laws; but in the case of women, a hot-house and stove cultivation has always been carried on of some of the capabilities of their nature, for the benefit and pleasure of their masters Then, because certain products of the general vital force sprout luxuriantly and reach a great development in this heated atmosphere and under this active nurture and watering, while other shoots from the same root, which are left outside in the wintry air, with ice purposely heaped all round them, have a stunted growth, and some are burnt off with fire and disappear; men, with that inability to recognise their own work which distinguishes the unanalytic mind, indolently believe that the tree grows of itself in the way they have made it grow, and that it would die if one half of it were not kept in a vapour bath and the other half in the snow."

Please note that 'empathy' and 'systematizing' scores are calculated either by questionairre, in which the participant is not blinded to either their own gender or to societal expectations of their gender, or by psychologists observing the participants in experiments where the psychologist is aware of both as well. Women know that they're not supposed to be clinical, and know that clinical outlooks are required of scientists, and therefore know that society will perceive of them as less feminine if they go into science. And vice-versa for men and, say, nursing.
see also:
http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscienc ... r.php#more
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notro ... al-muzzle/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notro ... -at-maths/
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_an ... evers.html

One thing that does seem to be different, in general, between women and men in western culture is that women both exert more social pressure to conform and are influenced more by social pressure to conform. That's based entirely on my own un-scientific observation.


advancingwomen.org/files/7/127.pdf
I suggest that you read the whole thing; it's quite relevant. Note that the study occurred in Sweden.


?
Is that you just setting up a bogus slippery-slope argument, or is that an acutal policy somewhere? If an actual policy, yeah: that's really stupid.

Ok, it was a slippery-slope argument. The vast majority of women at my hospital have had children. None are currently on maternity leave. Maternity leave (and, btw, I absolutely support the right of fathers to congruent paternity leave as well - which sort of takes the air out of your argument, eh?) takes up a very small proportion of a woman's productive life, except in extremely patriarchal countries like Romania under Ceausescu, who outlawed all birth control.


Hahahahahah!
Feminism will turn us all into a paranoid, paternalistic Asian dictatorship that worships its leader! Oh, Noes!

he who?
finally, XKCD for the win:

That's a good question. The medicalization of normal childhood seems to be hitting boys harder than girls, too.

Fair enough.

I'm just speculating on your question and I'm not sure how schools are where you are from but here they've changed quite a bit.

The following is just me thinking out loud, so I'm not focused on everything being source verified or entirely logical

Starting with primary and secondary school (6 - 15) there was a change enacted in 1997, that not only changed the curriculum, including the removal of some subjects and the addition of others. There was an added focus on working in groups, the school was based on the principle that "we are not going to teach kids how to behave" (yes that is a direct and accurate translation), when you add to this that 90% of the teachers from grade 1 - grade 3 are female, from 4 - 7 a total of 68% of teachers are female and from grade 8 - 10 its roughly 50, 50. This means that there is a possibility that the heavy overweight of female teachers in grades 1 - 7 are subconsciously creating classrooms more suited for females.

When you add in that the Norwegian school system according to PISA have the most unruly students out of the 30 industrialized countries in the study and is the one that takes the worst care of both academically gifted pupils and the academically challenged, I think we can come up with a potential explanation for more men getting a bad start in Norwegian schools. This is if the premise "boys are more unruly than girls in school between ages 6 and 15" is true. A personal observation of mine was that in my school growing up, the boys were always more unruly when the teacher was a female or a feminized male and less unruly when the teacher was a male or masculine woman.

The trade schools were a traditional home of those who were less academically gifted, however in the 1997 reform, this was made significantly more theoretical and similar to the general studies, which meant that the less academically adept struggled with vocational school studies as much if not more than people who picked the general studies. It also included changes to the general studies direction and the potential third year a vocational school student could elect to take to qualify for university. This overall made it a lot harder to get through vocational schools and qualify for further studies which could also have a potential effect.

Eeeyeah, not funny in either context. I don't like jokes about women abusing their domesic partners - something I acutally do see far too often. It's couched in a kind of, 'she's so badass/strong, not only does he not hit her, but the abuse goes in the wrong direction!' Supposed to be funny because, I guess, a man who's abused deserves it because he's weak? And because it's unexpected, because the abuse usually goes in the other direction? But not funny because both of those things are terrible - one for not being true, but believed anyway, and the other for being true.

Given the amount of times I've seen anti-feminist threads on this board (some with pretty friggin' bad arguments, btw), I must ask - does anyone else agree with the feminist propositions? Namely, that...

• Gender equality is an ideal to strive for.
• Structural inequalities that disadvantage women still exist.

Wrt women asking for raises:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html