Gender differences and how feminism encourages inequality and resentment

Watch this thread
alex_cs
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
Everyone in Britain knows that males and females/men and women are different.
  • Males have more muscle and on average twice females's upper body strength. This means that they are more able to work in workplaces where physical strength is required, such as construction sites.
  • Males are more objective as the male hormone cycle fluctuates much less wildly than females. This means that if you want a job done reliably and uniformly over a long period of time you would be better with a male, especially if there is danger involved.
  • Males have more testosterone than females which makes them better at decision-making and better able to work in high-pressure environments like the military and the stock exchange. It also means that more males are entrepeneurs.
  • Males have greater IQ variability. So males almost always do better in technical fields where high amounts of intelligence are required, such as STEM.
All the above are uncontroversial, indisputable facts. But many females actually believe that the reason they are paid less or that they perform less well is because of discrimination, or 'male patriarchy', or a 'glass ceiling'. That is the myth that feminism pushes-and it's pernicious because it encourages hate and resentment towards males by females. Also it encourages females to seek 'redress' through laws removing the 'obstacles' to female success such as hiring quotas and forcing employers to put up with maternity leave. But that's not equality-it's inequality unless males have similar exclusively beneficial laws.
2
reply
caravaggio2
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
(Original post by alex_cs)
All the above are uncontroversial, indisputable facts.
Good luck with that.😊
2
reply
Eigo_Jin
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
Although there is equal opportunity in all jobs, there is no equal outcome, because of the facts you just stated. However, feminists are not satisfied that there's not enough women working in the IT, even it's the women's choice not to work in that field. That's the reason why they complain about issues that aren't really issues, such as the wage gap (which doesn't exist).
Feminists, though, are practically a terrorist group anyways so with all that complaining, they have achieved something. Women have special treatment so that they are "equal". For example, having a quota on the number of women in the workplace (which means picking a less qualified women over a more qualified man) and lowing requirements of jobs that need a lot of physical work. For example, making the physical exam of being a firefighter "easier" so that more women can pass.
What a world we live in...
9
reply
P357
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by alex_cs)
Everyone in Britain knows that males and females/men and women are different.
  • Males have more muscle and on average twice females's upper body strength. This means that they are more able to work in workplaces where physical strength is required, such as construction sites.
  • Males are more objective as the male hormone cycle fluctuates much less wildly than females. This means that if you want a job done reliably and uniformly over a long period of time you would be better with a male, especially if there is danger involved.
  • Males have more testosterone than females which makes them better at decision-making and better able to work in high-pressure environments like the military and the stock exchange. It also means that more males are entrepeneurs.
  • Males have greater IQ variability. So males almost always do better in technical fields where high amounts of intelligence are required, such as STEM.
All the above are uncontroversial, indisputable facts. But many females actually believe that the reason they are paid less or that they perform less well is because of discrimination, or 'male patriarchy', or a 'glass ceiling'. That is the myth that feminism pushes-and it's pernicious because it encourages hate and resentment towards males by females. Also it encourages females to seek 'redress' through laws removing the 'obstacles' to female success such as hiring quotas and forcing employers to put up with maternity leave. But that's not equality-it's inequality unless males have similar exclusively beneficial laws.
what even...no.God no. I'm insanely anti-feminist and to me you just come across as one of those frustrated little weirdos that spend their time browsing anti-women forums/sites when he's not getting off to misogyny porn, in an attempt to deal with the sheer revulsion he experiences from womankind 24/7.
5
reply
steepling
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
There's two aspects to this:
  • Women are subject to discrimination because they are female, despite being able to do a job to a same level as the male competitor
  • Women are subject to discrimination because they are female, and while they are unable to compete with a male competitor, this is due to being female
The first one is generally not a problem in Europe. The second one is what is being debated.
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by steepling)
There's two aspects to this:
  • Women are subject to discrimination because they are female, despite being able to do a job to a same level as the male competitor
  • Women are subject to discrimination because they are female, and while they are unable to compete with a male competitor, this is due to being female
The first one is generally not a problem in Europe. The second one is what is being debated.
Actually, there are 3 aspects to this.

1. When you refer to 'women' who are you referring to? All women, some women, 10% of women, a minority of women? Who? Do you think all women are the same?

2. Can you provide evidence of this 'discrimination' you speak of existing on anything even coming close to resembling a 'systemic' scale? Is it the same 'discrimination' men face when they only amount to 20% of all primary school teachers, or 40% of University applications?

3. Do you know anything about this? Have you read about this? Or are you merely reiterating what someone else has told you? Did that person have a vested interest in manufacturing female dependency? Did that person have a vested interest in manufacturing a narrative about the non-existent societal group that is 'women'?
0
reply
steepling
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by TheCitizenAct)
Actually, there are 3 aspects to this.

1. When you refer to 'women' who are you referring to? All women, some women, 10% of women, a minority of women? Who? Do you think all women are the same?

2. Can you provide evidence of this 'discrimination' you speak of existing on anything even coming close to resembling a 'systemic' scale? Is it the same 'discrimination' men face when they only amount to 20% of all primary school teachers, or 40% of University applications?

3. Do you know anything about this? Have you read about this? Or are you merely reiterating what someone else has told you? Did that person have a vested interest in manufacturing female dependency? Did that person have a vested interest in manufacturing a narrative about the non-existent societal group that is 'women'?
1) Women. All women.
2) It might be. It could fall into either of my categories. It could form a part of the men's rights movement.
3) What?
0
reply
alex_cs
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#8
(Original post by caravaggio2)
Good luck with that.😊
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.
0
reply
a noble chance
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
(Original post by alex_cs)
Everyone in Britain knows that males and females/men and women are different.
  • Males have more muscle and on average twice females's upper body strength. This means that they are more able to work in workplaces where physical strength is required, such as construction sites.
  • Males are more objective as the male hormone cycle fluctuates much less wildly than females. This means that if you want a job done reliably and uniformly over a long period of time you would be better with a male, especially if there is danger involved.
  • Males have more testosterone than females which makes them better at decision-making and better able to work in high-pressure environments like the military and the stock exchange. It also means that more males are entrepeneurs.
  • Males have greater IQ variability. So males almost always do better in technical fields where high amounts of intelligence are required, such as STEM.
All the above are uncontroversial, indisputable facts. But many females actually believe that the reason they are paid less or that they perform less well is because of discrimination, or 'male patriarchy', or a 'glass ceiling'. That is the myth that feminism pushes-and it's pernicious because it encourages hate and resentment towards males by females. Also it encourages females to seek 'redress' through laws removing the 'obstacles' to female success such as hiring quotas and forcing employers to put up with maternity leave. But that's not equality-it's inequality unless males have similar exclusively beneficial laws.
(Original post by Eigo-Jin)
Although there is equal opportunity in all jobs, there is no equal outcome, because of the facts you just stated. However, feminists are not satisfied that there's not enough women working in the IT, even it's the women's choice not to work in that field. That's the reason why they complain about issues that aren't really issues, such as the wage gap (which doesn't exist).
Feminists, though, are practically a terrorist group anyways so with all that complaining, they have achieved something. Women have special treatment so that they are "equal". For example, having a quota on the number of women in the workplace (which means picking a less qualified women over a more qualified man) and lowing requirements of jobs that need a lot of physical work. For example, making the physical exam of being a firefighter "easier" so that more women can pass.
What a world we live in...
What I don't understand is how any woman could possibly feel comfortable about getting special treatment on account of her gender in today's society. Initiatives like all-women's shortlists are not just profoundly illiberal, they're also profoundly insulting to women, and I'm confident that the likes of Sylvia Pankhurst, Millicent Fawcett and Virginia Woolf would see this example as a token gesture by the establishment which is not only completely unnecessary and humiliating in its infantilisation of women (since women have no man-made barrier of any kind to political office today) but also as a way of masking any underlying problems with how the general female population see and are conditioned to see their abilities and 'proper place' in society.

The problem is seen to be that there are fewer women than men in Parliament, and the proposed solution is to force more of them in by stopping men from running on party tickets in certain constituencies, thereby increasing the number of women in Parliament by political violence and cunning but leaving the original (ostensible) issue that fewer women want to run in the first place.

What many feminists today don't seem to realise, especially in younger generations, is that the sort of thing a large majority of feminists push for today is not at all what the large majority of early feminists were fighting and sometimes dying for - in cases like this it is in a sense the complete reverse. We live in a world today where fairness means equality and equality means equality of outcome, and any deviation from this end-game is seen as an anomaly that needs to be bent in to shape with the rest of the line at any cost.
2
reply
a noble chance
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
(Original post by P357)
what even...no.God no. I'm insanely anti-feminist and to me you just come across as one of those frustrated little weirdos that spend their time browsing anti-women forums/sites when he's not getting off to misogyny porn, in an attempt to deal with the sheer revulsion he experiences from womankind 24/7.
The second and third statements you emboldened in your response are scientific fact. There is ample evidence supporting them and the scientific community has reached consensuses that they are true. I'm not as sure about the first. Google is your friend.
0
reply
WokSz
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 6 years ago
#11
This will be entertaining.
0
reply
black_mamba
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
(Original post by a noble chance)
What I don't understand is how any woman could possibly feel comfortable about getting special treatment on account of her gender in today's society.
We, or at least I, don't. It's embarrassing!
0
reply
P357
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 6 years ago
#13
(Original post by a noble chance)
The second and third statements you emboldened in your response are scientific fact. There is ample evidence supporting them and the scientific community has reached consensuses that they are true. I'm not as sure about the first. Google is your friend.
Not quite. Men do have higher levels of testosterone...however it doesn't follow from here that this objectively implies that they're better at decision-making...that's really not what testosterone is responsible for...This is a classic case of someone trying to twist biological facts to suit some kind of agenda.
And yes, i'll give op that higher iq variability has been observed in men. What bothers me is the automatic inference to greater intelligence as though IQ is 1. the sole determinant of intelligence and 2. entirely genetic/set-in-stone(this has not been determined scientifically just yet). I wonder how OP would respond to the fact that among the few people to beat Einstein's IQ was a female journalist from new york who in my humble opinion hasn't done much with her life...
Honestly, Op's case is classic woman-hating and his kind hinders the anti-feminist movement. He should stop and find some other kind of outlet for his insecurities and inadequacies.
0
reply
Eigo_Jin
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
(Original post by a noble chance)
What I don't understand is how any woman could possibly feel comfortable about getting special treatment on account of her gender in today's society. Initiatives like all-women's shortlists are not just profoundly illiberal, they're also profoundly insulting to women, and I'm confident that the likes of Sylvia Pankhurst, Millicent Fawcett and Virginia Woolf would see this example as a token gesture by the establishment which is not only completely unnecessary and humiliating in its infantilisation of women (since women have no man-made barrier of any kind to political office today) but also as a way of masking any underlying problems with how the general female population see and are conditioned to see their abilities and 'proper place' in society.

The problem is seen to be that there are fewer women than men in Parliament, and the proposed solution is to force more of them in by stopping men from running on party tickets in certain constituencies, thereby increasing the number of women in Parliament by political violence and cunning but leaving the original (ostensible) issue that fewer women want to run in the first place.

What many feminists today don't seem to realise, especially in younger generations, is that the sort of thing a large majority of feminists push for today is not at all what the large majority of early feminists were fighting and sometimes dying for - in cases like this it is in a sense the complete reverse. We live in a world today where fairness means equality and equality means equality of outcome, and any deviation from this end-game is seen as an anomaly that needs to be bent in to shape with the rest of the line at any cost.
That is why I, as a women, does not support this movement. Modern/third wave feminism just paints all women as victims and all men as evil scum that need to be annihilated. It never occurs to them that just because an opportunity is presented (e.g. becoming an MP), that women will take it. Hence why so few women actually want to work in parliament and women voters commonly vote in male MPs.
0
reply
middymoo
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 6 years ago
#15
I describe myself as a feminist. Not a misandrist. This is because the movement of feminism isn't 'women are better than men and deserve special treatment'. That is misandry. Feminism is the fight for equality. That means equal coverage of female and male sports. It means that men don't feel ashamed to admit that they are a nurse/nanny/cleaner because they are seen as 'female' jobs. Yes, some areas are heavily dominated by one sex. But how much of that is the physical anatomy of the sexes and how much is history? Historically, women weren't schooled as far as men as they were usually housekeepers. That meant there was always less women in technical and academic jobs. However, now education IS equal (there are actually more women at University now than men for the first time) it should only be accepted that women have the skills to enter careers such as economics, engineering and politics that previously only men could
1
reply
Eigo_Jin
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
(Original post by middymoo)
I describe myself as a feminist. Not a misandrist. This is because the movement of feminism isn't 'women are better than men and deserve special treatment'. That is misandry. Feminism is the fight for equality. That means equal coverage of female and male sports. It means that men don't feel ashamed to admit that they are a nurse/nanny/cleaner because they are seen as 'female' jobs. Yes, some areas are heavily dominated by one sex. But how much of that is the physical anatomy of the sexes and how much is history? Historically, women weren't schooled as far as men as they were usually housekeepers. That meant there was always less women in technical and academic jobs. However, now education IS equal (there are actually more women at University now than men for the first time) it should only be accepted that women have the skills to enter careers such as economics, engineering and politics that previously only men could
Yes, and what is feminism now? We have all the rights that men has and, as you said, there is more women in university then men. So what are women in this developed country fighting for now? Equal coverage of sports for both sexes? Hardly noble and a very first world problem. You don't need feminism for this. Also, I can't see what you're point is. There is opportunities for women in every field and yet they still don't enter? Maybe this tells us that the two genders are different. Undeniably so, because of social and biological factors. The females and males of the human race are NOT the same.
Plus, people DO uphold women in areas that are male dominated. They are recognized for being a minority and have schemes and support to help specifically women in these fields-special treatment?
0
reply
middymoo
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 6 years ago
#17
(Original post by Eigo-Jin)
Plus, people DO uphold women in areas that are male dominated. They are recognized for being a minority and have schemes and support to help specifically women in these fields-special treatment?
Maybe that is to protect women. If you are male you have no idea what it is like to feel threatened by a group of posturing males. Being the only women in a male dominated job brings its own stresses about safety and well-being that need special measures. Until the field is less single sex dominated those measures will need to be kept
0
reply
Eigo_Jin
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 6 years ago
#18
(Original post by middymoo)
Maybe that is to protect women. If you are male you have no idea what it is like to feel threatened by a group of posturing males. Being the only women in a male dominated job brings its own stresses about safety and well-being that need special measures. Until the field is less single sex dominated those measures will need to be kept
1. I am a female (shocker, I'm a female and don't support feminism?!)
2. I study in the IT field. I am one of two females in my class which has 20+ students in it.
I have never felt threatened by them. You imply that every man will make you stressed for simply being a male. Pretty ironically, my IT teacher is a women and has never once complained about being in a male-dominated field.
Here's the thing, you think of yourself as a victim ("protect women"), you label any female that's in a male-dominated field a victim. I'm not saying that there aren't any real victims in these fields but it's a minority (like most crimes).

Also, you never mentioned the stresses a man feels if he's in a field that's female dominated. That's the thing with feminism: you only look at women's issues, completely disregarding that men can actually be discriminated against (sometimes more than women) even though feminists says that it's a movement for equality of the sexes.

And yet again, EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT = EQUAL OUTCOME. What are you going to do, force women into fields that are male-dominated, even if they have no interest in the subject? You'll find that the women that are interested in the subject will already be in it.
2
reply
middymoo
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by Eigo-Jin)

And yet again, EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT = EQUAL OUTCOME. What are you going to do, force women into fields that are male-dominated, even if they have no interest in the subject? You'll find that the women that are interested in the subject will already be in it.
Again, it is a lack of education. Girls from a young age are gently pushed (and I am not saying all are, but the majority) into playing with dolls etc i.e games that involve caring. Boys are pushed into playing with construction, building etc. Therefore from a very young age children have a pre-conception of 'boys' things and 'girls' things and are less likely to develop an interest in the other.

I know that a majority of women with have no interest in a particular subject, but the idea of feminism is giving everyone regardless of gender the equal opportunity to do what they want to do.
0
reply
a noble chance
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 6 years ago
#20
(Original post by middymoo)
Again, it is a lack of education. Girls from a young age are gently pushed (and I am not saying all are, but the majority) into playing with dolls etc i.e games that involve caring. Boys are pushed into playing with construction, building etc. Therefore from a very young age children have a pre-conception of 'boys' things and 'girls' things and are less likely to develop an interest in the other.

I know that a majority of women with have no interest in a particular subject, but the idea of feminism is giving everyone regardless of gender the equal opportunity to do what they want to do.
The idea that playing with dolls or cars at a young age is responsible for gender imbalances in certain occupations sounds pretty ridiculous to me and I'd be grateful if you could cite some scientific evidence to back it up.

If someone is genuinely interested in a subject, they will pursue it of their own accord, and I highly doubt that what toys they play with as a small child is of any real consequence either to whether interests are ever ignited in an individual that would otherwise develop them or whether they decide to pursue these interests or not.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Physics Paper 1 exam go?

Great! Feeling positive (146)
29.03%
It went fairly well (239)
47.51%
It didn't go too well (75)
14.91%
TERRIBLE! (43)
8.55%

Watched Threads

View All