Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Feminism, are we actually equal? Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AKB2000)
    Punished? Not really, white men still have the most opportunities out of all the groups, white men do not need any privileges because they already have them when their born. I think everyone should have equal opportunities when they are born, but this will likely never happen, but the least society can do is try.
    'Positive discrimination' gives an edge to minorities and women which in turn disadvantages white men. This notion that white men are ultimately privileged is so antiquated, you won't be able to give a single example of how young white men are privileged that you can actually back up with evidence.

    (Original post by AKB2000)
    It was an example and there are many more. Also what on earth can we do in the west to help woman being oppressed else where? I'm not just going to hop on a plane to the east and protest there?! So I will at least stand up for what I believe in here.
    It was a trivial example of something meaningless and baseless. If you really care about women then appeal to the government to try influence change in countries where women are truly oppressed. We both know you won't, you'll continue to moan about trivial things you can't prove even exist.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Ahh Feminism, a movement which was hijacked by a load of nut cases who've smeared the image of the entire group.

    The feminists that aren't bat s*** crazy should separate themselves from the movement and recreate it from the ground up making the original intentions of the it clearer, only then would anyone ever begin to take them seriously.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AKB2000)
    What century are u from? Jesus Christ it makes me so sad people think this.

    Many woman do like splitting the bill, this was a society construct when woman were housewives and men where the "breadwinners", but as this is starting to move out of our society, this is not relevant anymore. And other "male privileges" u mentioned are general courtesy for either gender to follow.
    Although I can agree that many things may not be relevant anymore, I suggest to remember that society constructs are not just some made up things. Constructs evolved, partly adapting to challanges that society had to face in the past. Note that the XVIIIth or XIXth century society, although had many bad points, it was overall extremely succeful in many areas. It created a very progressive and expanding civilisation, capable both of great discoveries, and defeating any enemy it wished to encounter.

    (Original post by AKB2000)
    Just an example some people may recognise if a boy takes control of a group he's a leader, if a girl does the same she is bossy.
    Sometimes it maybe how you describe it, but sometimes it’s because some women lack self-confidence on traditionally masculine posts and they are bossy, to underline their position. This makes life of their employees difficult, it’s counterproductive and it makes anti-female stereotypes stronger.

    Personally I don’t care, I just dislike young leaders who want to be leaders, because all I’ve met so far had paranoid personality disorder. The best leaders are older people, like 60+. They know their job, they know what really matters, they have lots of experience with people which make them great mediators and natural leaders. Also, usually they don’t have this sick young wolf’s ambitions to pursue their career at costs of everything and everyone.

    (Original post by AKB2000)

    In most of if not all countries Woman are not allowed to fight on the front line anyway in their military. Also many woman do work in the military, and if there weren't so many stereotypes that it is a mans job many more would be in that field.
    You’re wrong. In many countries women are allowed to fight in the front line. And there is something that needs to be said.

    Because there are some mental and physical differences between men and women, at least on average, there is no doubt about that. This suggest, that actually both genders must tend to specialise and slightly different areas.

    Army is perhaps one of the cases where this differences become visible. Military experience shows that women and men perform best in quite different roles on the battlefield. Men are better frontline soldiers, while women perform better in partisan actions or as snipers. In some armies, feminism enforced without respect to equality or combat performance, decreases morale and overall performance of unit, because women have lower physical standards to pass, which causes some obvious problems. Also, though women can be very though fighters, they have problems in executing coordinated actions in heavy stress, such us coordinated defense and withdrawal under heavy fire, or assault. In some cases, soldiers must perform strictly coordinated action, ignoring heavy casualties they’re taking. Women are less capable of such actions. Because on average they are physically weaker, they also make worse tankers, especially drivers as many tanks still require strong physical strength to be driven for longer periods of time. Also, tank crews should be as strong as possible, so they can quickly put on a lost track when recovery vehicle is not nearby, and get back to action- then some women can probably make good tankers, but on average they are less suitable for the role, because they are weaker.

    I’m okay with women in the army, but they should be taken under exactly the same standards men, to assure high combat performance. Some individual women can surely meet this requirements, but the fact remains, men are on average more suited for the role of soldiers, at least because of their physical strength.

    (Original post by AKB2000)

    Why would woman fight woman rights when it comes to garbage collectors?! Of course women don't fight for careers they, and most other people, do not want?! Why the hell would anyone fight for something and then not actually have anything to do with the thing they are fighting for?!
    So we may both agree, a tendency that some bad jobs are occupied by both genders, is not the case. People just tend to take jobs for which they are suited, aren’t they?

    (Original post by AKB2000)

    currently there are many more important battles to fight for women.
    Like doing something with bad image of feminism and counter-productive actions. (Among other things)

    (Original post by AKB2000)

    independent, strong, masculine, which is so wrong, I understand that for some people it is the natural order, but these gender roles shouldn't be expected, it was necessary for survival back in the Stone Age,
    This expectations is mainly what I hear from women about their ideal partners. And you want to fight an instinct built during hundreds of thousands years of human existence... no wait! This instinct is millions years old, as among mammals, males tend to be bigger and stronger than females. Good luck with your fight!

    (Original post by AKB2000)

    Feminists believe that people can be who they want to be. Feminists believe that people can follow any career they want to follow. Feminists believe that we shouldn't judge others for being different, we should embrace them.
    Ugh, okay, but you’re sabotaging your case with such illogical statements. People always judge everything, also for being different and there is nothing wrong about it! Let’s say, that someone judges that a particular woman is very capable in maths or science – so she is being let to do something related in that field. If we presumed that everyone are equal by wrong understanding of the word, and decided to give a math related job to man, because he’s a man, and on average men are slightly more capable in maths it would be disastrous, as averages tell us nothing about qualities of an individual. To judge is not to blame!

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)

    There is a wage gap, yes you can remove it by statistically controlling for explanatory factors, I.e job position, and career field, but then you are manipulating your argument.
    All we need to do to make sure there is no wage gap, is to make a law that forces females and males to have equal time of maternity and paternity holidays, and perhaps to increase wages of women who specialised in some not the highest income jobs, such as teachers of nursery schools. Everywhere else, free market seems doing pretty well introducing a real meritocracy.

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)

    Men are still encouraged to enter higher earning fields, and senior roles. Not because they are more capable, or because they are born with an innate love for STEM or economics, but because of our social environment.
    Are you absolutely sure about that? What does current research tell us about average cognitive abilities of both genders? Because they are always slightly different in all sources I've read so far. By no means unequal, but each gender tends to be on average better in different areas, which naturally improves their chances in particular careers, that vary in wages.



    (Original post by Twinpeaks)

    A boy is born with the expectation to be interested in engineering, a girl is born with the expectation to be interested in caring. For boys to enter such fields they conform, for girls to enter those fields they fight against the grain. Do not underestimate the power of that.


    Yeap, that is correct. But we should not mix up creating opportunities to children with enfocing some roles on them. Individuals have very different qualities. Personally, as someone who did not have a chance to learn something as a child, inspite of having real talent towards that, I'm more concerned about general competence of parents and their will to provide their children with opportunities to learn, rather than just focusing on girls. The problem with education of children is much bigger than that.



    (Original post by Twinpeaks)

    Yes in regards to legislation women are now equal. But there is still a lot of inequality in regards to attitudes, beliefs, and gender roles. And anyone with the slightest knowledge of psychology would understand the sheer significance of those factors on an individual's development and potential.


    Never heard anything of the sort. People who limit individuals due to stereotypes and average values are generally stupid anyway. Whatever they gener attitude, a family of stupid people is unlikely to rise a clever child, even if DNA instability gave the child a bonus.

    I'm far more concerned about position of women in less developed parts of the world. And I think that what everybody need, is to introduce lessons of logic, critical thinking, data researching and philosophy to schools. Many things are pushed to children's heads, without proper basis, and though they learn it by heart, they often don't really understand what they've learned. Also they left the schools unable to think independently. And this causes many various problems, including judgements on prejudice and stereotypes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AKB2000)
    I'm going to start this off by saying Feminism is equality for BOTH genders, it is not "man hating" the only reason why people believe this is because the only extreme cases reach the media which often are just man hating protests. In my opinion we are still not equal even in first world countries. Just an example some people may recognise if a boy takes control of a group he's a leader, if a girl does the same she is bossy.
    An attempt is being made to stop White women from reproducing, by sending them out to work and university, even if they don't want to go.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    All we need to do to make sure there is no wage gap, is to make a law that forces females and males to have equal time of maternity and paternity holidays, and perhaps to increase wages of women who specialised in some not the highest income jobs, such as teachers of nursery schools. Everywhere else, free market seems doing pretty well introducing a real meritocracy.



    Are you absolutely sure about that? What does current research tell us about average cognitive abilities of both genders? Because they are always slightly different in all sources I've read so far. By no means unequal, but each gender tends to be on average better in different areas, which naturally improves their chances in particular careers, that vary in wages.







    Yeap, that is correct. But we should not mix up creating opportunities to children with enfocing some roles on them. Individuals have very different qualities. Personally, as someone who did not have a chance to learn something as a child, inspite of having real talent towards that, I'm more concerned about general competence of parents and their will to provide their children with opportunities to learn, rather than just focusing on girls. The problem with education of children is much bigger than that.







    Never heard anything of the sort. People who limit individuals due to stereotypes and average values are generally stupid anyway. Whatever they gener attitude, a family of stupid people is unlikely to rise a clever child, even if DNA instability gave the child a bonus.

    I'm far more concerned about position of women in less developed parts of the world. And I think that what everybody need, is to introduce lessons of logic, critical thinking, data researching and philosophy to schools. Many things are pushed to children's heads, without proper basis, and though they learn it by heart, they often don't really understand what they've learned. Also they left the schools unable to think independently. And this causes many various problems, including judgements on prejudice and stereotypes.
    Disagree. To reduce the wage gap women should be encouraged to enter STEM careers and senior roles. To do this is a very complex matter and would require altering the social environment from a very young age. Although positive discrimination will help through changing social norms in the long term.

    "Am I absolutely sure about that". Having spent 4 years with my nose in the likes of Trends in Cognitive Sciences, I am yes...

    So let's straighten something up first and foremost. I briefly saw you said that men are slightly better at maths on average, than women. Wrong.

    Research actually suggests that women are "slightly better" than men on average. To expand, if we were to look at mathematic ability around the average mark, i.e slightly above and below, more females congregate on the slightly above average mark than males.

    However, more males congregate on the more extreme end of the scales. I.e, more males are retarded (used as a scientific not derogatory term), and also extremely brilliant at Maths. So if you are to say, that men are better than women at Maths, you must also consider, that men are worse than women at Maths.

    It is also worth arguing that many STEM jobs do not require extreme brilliance at Maths. Only an above average ability, in order to enter fields such as engineering. You do not need to be a minority individual with an extreme intelligence, but you need to be smart. With that considered, women are no less capable than men. Categorically.



    However. Do you know what does have a robust influence on math performance? Attitudes and stereotypes. If you are led to believe that your gender makes you less capable at Maths, you will perform less well.
    This is a very well established effect called stereotype threat, coming from one significant study which has been replicated many times across many different contexts.

    In brief, Asian women completed a maths test. Before completing the test, the "experimenter" made one of two stereotypes salient. The first stereotype- Asians are good at Maths. The second stereotype- Women are no good at Maths.
    When the first stereotype was made salient, the women scored better than control at the test. When the second stereotype was made salient, the women performed worse.

    This highlights the influence of self belief and confidence on performance. And therefore highlights the sheer significance of attitudes and beliefs on performance.

    When you said, women on average are worse than men at Maths, you were incorrect, and perpetuating a damaging stereotype that has dissuaded women from studying such subjects and entering into such careers, and still does.

    You haven't heard that our social environment effects behaviour? Really?

    Everyone uses stereotypes to some degree, it is a natural response to make sense of our environment. You do, and I do. So no, it's not only idiots who are vulnerable, it is all of us.

    Concern isn't a finite tool. I care about the state of 3rd world countries, but that doesn't stop me from caring about our country. Why set the standard of inequality so low?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hotel1000)
    An attempt is being made to stop White women from reproducing, by sending them out to work and university, even if they don't want to go.
    An attempt is being made to give people choices instead of obligations
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    It's very likely that positive discrimination will make anti-feminist sentiments even stronger than they are. Encouragement is okay, but positive discrimination may turn out counterproductive.

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    So let's straighten something up first and foremost. I briefly saw you said that men are slightly better at maths on average, than women. Wrong.
    Because they are, for the reason that they are discouraged from developing in field. There is no contradicion. And even If I was to say a false stereotype, believing it's absolutely true, it would do no harm because I insisted that children should have opportunity to develop in any field, and that individuals should be judged upon their individual qualities, not upon averages which tell something only about large groups of people.

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    It is also worth arguing that many STEM jobs do not require extreme brilliance at Maths. Only an above average ability, in order to enter fields such as engineering. You do not need to be a minority individual with an extreme intelligence, but you need to be smart. With that considered, women are no less capable than men. Categorically.
    Ok. No argument there.

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    When you said, women on average are worse than men at Maths, you were incorrect, and perpetuating a damaging stereotype that has dissuaded women from studying such subjects and entering into such careers, and still does.
    The society is poorly educated then. Averages have nothing to do with idividuals. Also, a general knowledge should tell them, there are individuals who are very different to most often met people, then nobody should be discouraged from something untill his or her abilities are well examined in that field.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    It's very likely that positive discrimination will make anti-feminist sentiments even stronger than they are. Encouragement is okay, but positive discrimination may turn out counterproductive.



    Because they are, for the reason that they are discouraged from developing in field. There is no contradicion. And even If I was to say a false stereotype, believing it's absolutely true, it would do no harm because I insisted that children should have opportunity to develop in any field, and that individuals should be judged upon their individual qualities, not upon averages which tell something only about large groups of people.


    Ok. No argument there.



    The society is poorly educated then. Averages have nothing to do with idividuals. Also, a general knowledge should tell them, there are individuals who are very different to most often met people, then nobody should be discouraged from something untill his or her abilities are well examined in that field.
    I don't understand what you mean in the second paragraph "because they are". Can you please expand?


    You say that, but you judged an entire gender by a stereotype yourself in an earlier post! It's nothing to do with education... I feel like you've simply ignored everything I said to be honest?
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    I don't understand what you mean in the second paragraph "because they are". Can you please expand?


    You say that, but you judged an entire gender by a stereotype yourself in an earlier post! It's nothing to do with education... I feel like you've simply ignored everything I said to be honest?
    You claim yourself that women are discouraged from learning maths, and discouragement can make one perform worse even if he or she is competent in the area. If they are discouraged from early years, they don't develop in the field, then we have population of adults among which on average, women are not as good in maths as men. I know this can be changed, because it has background in society, not in biology but that is irrelevant to my point:

    Whatever the reason and whatever is some information on averages true or not, a judgement regarding individual cannot take averages into account, because averages say nothing about individal qaulities. If someone says that a man is better for a job because it's a man, or a woman is worse for the job because it's a woman, such person first of all is not a chauvinist. First of all it's an idiot who cannot make a distincion between averages and individuals and lacking general knowledge.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    You claim yourself that women are discouraged from learning maths, and discouragement can make one perform worse even if he or she is competent in the area. If they are discouraged from early years, they don't develop in the field, then we have population of adults among which on average, women are not as good in maths as men. I know this can be changed, because it has background in society, not in biology but that is irrelevant to my point:

    Whatever the reason and whatever is some information on averages true or not, a judgement regarding individual cannot take averages into account, because averages say nothing about individal qaulities. If someone says that a man is better for a job because it's a man, or a woman is worse for the job because it's a woman, such person first of all is not a chauvinist. First of all it's an idiot who cannot make a distincion between averages and individuals and lacking general knowledge.

    Gender differences in subject choice is impossible throughout the "early years", because maths and science is compulsory. The difference in choice emerges at A-level and degree level.
    Although I do agree that differences in subject choice will alter Maths performance, good point.


    Yes I agree! You may think you judge every person as an individual, but people simply do not. People use stereotypes all the time, the cognitive word for it is heuristics. To make sense of such a complex world we use short cuts all the time, we categorise people and make prior judgements to help us predict and understand behaviour.

    That is a product of our intelligence, and it has its uses but it can also lead to damaging consequences if those stereotypes are negative and unfounded. I've provided examples of the negative consequences of such stereotypes, so why would you oppose attempts to change such stereotypes?

    Even if you truly believe you don't use heuristics at all, you have to admit that others do. So why oppose it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The problem with feminism now has been perfectly outlined. There is no legal way in which women are disadvantaged. It's all about how they think women have it bad.

    Feminism is currently all about "women are encouraged" this or "stereotypes" that.

    Well done Einstein, you've figured out that people have ideas and expectations of everyone. Problem is you can't police thought and ideas so now you're stuck. Feminism is reduced to whining about small gripes over perception. I'm pretty sure once you grow up you realise that you can do what you want without the approval of everyone around you. If you can't grow the balls to apply for STEM fields cos you its "a male dominated environment" then the problem is you being a weak person who bows to peer pressure.

    As well as this, other feminist talking points are a joke. They rely on skewed statistics, misleading studies and a healthy dose of baseless narrative to be created.

    Read this thread it's 100% whining about how feminists perceive society views of women but have no concrete issues or any solutions. Feminism is an easy route to ***** and complain about non-issues.

    Quit whining about being called bossy and grow a thicker skin. Quit whining about beauty standards. Everyone else can deal with it, so can women surely? Don't like that men do more science subjects than women? Then take up science yourself or shut up.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mrtastyduck)
    The problem with feminism now has been perfectly outlined. There is no legal way in which women are disadvantaged. It's all about how they think women have it bad.

    Feminism is currently all about "women are encouraged" this or "stereotypes" that.

    Well done Einstein, you've figured out that people have ideas and expectations of everyone. Problem is you can't police thought and ideas so now you're stuck. Feminism is reduced to whining about small gripes over perception. I'm pretty sure once you grow up you realise that you can do what you want without the approval of everyone around you. If you can't grow the balls to apply for STEM fields cos you its "a male dominated environment" then the problem is you being a weak person who bows to peer pressure.

    As well as this, other feminist talking points are a joke. They rely on skewed statistics, misleading studies and a healthy dose of baseless narrative to be created.

    Read this thread it's 100% whining about how feminists perceive society views of women but have no concrete issues or any solutions. Feminism is an easy route to ***** and complain about non-issues.

    Quit whining about being called bossy and grow a thicker skin. Quit whining about beauty standards. Everyone else can deal with it, so can women surely? Don't like that men do more science subjects than women? Then take up science yourself or shut up.
    This post just perfectly highlights your ignorance about human nature. I'd hate to be like that...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Even if you truly believe you don't use heuristics at all, you have to admit that others do. So why oppose it.
    Of course I use, but I avoid using them when I know they cannot work. All one needs to know in order to get rid of gender stereotypes in his or her experience, is how the average values work, and some general knowledge from life, history or whatever, that some individuals may be outstanding.
    People from HR don't interview averages but particular people who may be extremely different from average.
    I think the problem of discrimination can be solved in different manner, that will also be usefull in other areas.

    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Gender differences in subject choice is impossible throughout the "early years", because maths and science is compulsory. The difference in choice emerges at A-level and degree level.
    Whatever. I only want as many children as possible to have possibilities to develop in various areas. You complain that girls are discouraged from maths, while lots of children are discouraged from various things. I was not allowed to learn playing piano, and when it was already too late to take it seriously, it turned out that I'm a natural talent because without any training I have better musical hearing than some music performance students, at the age when most of untrained people loose their musical abilities. My point is, there are many issues regarding education of children, not just girls being discouraged from maths.


    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Attempts to change such stereotypes?
    I'm for education focused on logic, independent and critical thinking, while I get an impression that governments and organisations try to fix prejudice with doctrines, so they are replacing one with another. Sometimes it's also counterproductive, as you see, lots of people hate feminists, and many feminists actually do act in a way that makes the hate justified. They are actually haters from another side.
    I also naively believe, that the problems adressed by feminism, equalism etc. does not exist among intelligent people. They can make fairly accurate judgements without all this. Of course, sometimes they are wrong, but they can change when they are open minded. I always change my opinion when I find well established facts contradicting to it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Since when is the ability to give birth a point towards equality? Talk about clutching at straws, but all it does is emphasise your lack of argument.

    There is a wage gap, yes you can remove it by statistically controlling for explanatory factors, I.e job position, and career field, but then you are manipulating your argument.

    Men are still encouraged to enter higher earning fields, and senior roles. Not because they are more capable, or because they are born with an innate love for STEM or economics, but because of our social environment.

    A boy is born with the expectation to be interested in engineering, a girl is born with the expectation to be interested in caring. For boys to enter such fields they conform, for girls to enter those fields they fight against the grain. Do not underestimate the power of that.

    Yes in regards to legislation women are now equal. But there is still a lot of inequality in regards to attitudes, beliefs, and gender roles. And anyone with the slightest knowledge of psychology would understand the sheer significance of those factors on an individual's development and potential.


    Blacks have had equal rights to whites in the US for years, therefore racism no longer exists in the US. That is your logic and it is reductionist and ignorant.

    You completely disregard the effect of terms such as "bossy", but you are so naive to the effect that it has on an individual and societal scale.

    Open your eyes.
    So I don't study physics because I like physics, but instead have been subliminally encouraged by societal factors that you can't even show me? lol
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    Of course I use, but I avoid using them when I know they cannot work. All one needs to know in order to get rid of gender stereotypes in his or her experience, is how the average values work, and some general knowledge from life, history or whatever, that some individuals may be outstanding.
    People from HR don't interview averages but particular people who may be extremely different from average.
    I think the problem of discrimination can be solved in different manner, that will also be usefull in other areas.


    Whatever. I only want as many children as possible to have possibilities to develop in various areas. You complain that girls are discouraged from maths, while lots of children are discouraged from various things. I was not allowed to learn playing piano, and when it was already too late to take it seriously, it turned out that I'm a natural talent because without any training I have better musical hearing than some music performance students, at the age when most of untrained people loose their musical abilities. My point is, there are many issues regarding education of children, not just girls being discouraged from maths.




    I'm for education focused on logic, independent and critical thinking, while I get an impression that governments and organisations try to fix prejudice with doctrines, so they are replacing one with another. Sometimes it's also counterproductive, as you see, lots of people hate feminists, and many feminists actually do act in a way that makes the hate justified. They are actually haters from another side.
    I also naively believe, that the problems adressed by feminism, equalism etc. does not exist among intelligent people. They can make fairly accurate judgements without all this. Of course, sometimes they are wrong, but they can change when they are open minded. I always change my opinion when I find well established facts contradicting to it.
    What do you mean people from HR don't interview averages? Of course they do, that makes absolutely no sense.

    One would argue that encouragement to pursue Maths is more of an important social issue than playing the piano, in regards to career development and income.
    Although access to the arts is an issue in its own right, it's not relevant to the discussion as it's more of a class than gender issue.


    You have a very naive opinion about people and it's borderline ignorant. Intelligent people can be just as closed minded as the rest. If you want to ignore an entire body of knowledge relating to stereotypes and it's effects based on nothing other than a naive, baseless opinion, then I really do not think you are as intelligent as you think you are. You aren't willing to learn anytning about this topic, which just seems ignorant to me.

    You say you don't use stereotypical thinking but your statement that "many feminists behave in a way which makes [hate towards] them justified" is a perfect example of stereotypical thinking. You are using the actions of select individuals to justify hatred towards an entire body of individuals. There cannot be a clearer example of prejudice than that.

    You think you are above such thinking but if anything, you're just as bad, if not worse.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    What do you mean people from HR don't interview averages? Of course they do, that makes absolutely no sense.

    One would argue that encouragement to pursue Maths is more of an important social issue than playing the piano, in regards to career development and income.
    Although access to the arts is an issue in its own right, it's not relevant to the discussion as it's more of a class than gender issue.


    You have a very naive opinion about people and it's borderline ignorant. Intelligent people can be just as closed minded as the rest. If you want to ignore an entire body of knowledge relating to stereotypes and it's effects based on nothing other than a naive, baseless opinion, then I really do not think you are as intelligent as you think you are. You aren't willing to learn anytning about this topic, which just seems ignorant to me.

    You say you don't use stereotypical thinking but your statement that "many feminists behave in a way which makes [hate towards] them justified" is a perfect example of stereotypical thinking. You are using the actions of select individuals to justify hatred towards an entire body of individuals. There cannot be a clearer example of prejudice than that.

    You think you are above such thinking but if anything, you're just as bad, if not worse.
    You purposefully changed his quote. That's rather dishonest, no?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AKB2000)
    Women have longer maternity leave because they give birth to a child, they force a child out of them? So they need recovery time!
    The pay gap is absolutely still a thing, yes it's not as bad, but it's still a thing.
    Lighter criminal sentences? There is no way u can measure that accurately.
    And men are more likely to die at work because women are still not allowed to do jobs which put them at higher risk, that in itself shows we still aren't equal.

    I don't think that society has adapted to equality for men and women, societies stereotypes from early time are still around, and we are still trying to break them.
    Men should be allowed to cry without being called weak, women should be allowed to be strong without being called manly.
    I am not man hating. I am simply stating that things still are far from equal. I agree there are some things where women have an advantage, but there are still many more things where men have an advantage.
    Ayyy, just end. Just stop. I genuinely feel sorry for you.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AKB2000)
    I'm going to start this off by saying Feminism is equality for BOTH genders, it is not "man hating" the only reason why people believe this is because the only extreme cases reach the media which often are just man hating protests. In my opinion we are still not equal even in first world countries. Just an example some people may recognise if a boy takes control of a group he's a leader, if a girl does the same she is bossy.
    Inequality can never be completely eradicated from society. If that was the case then we would be living in a utopia and utopias are impossible to replicate successfully. Centuries of campaigning has finally led to us women gaining our human rights in the western world. However, it hasn't eradicated sexism. Women still face sexual harassment at the workplace and rape statistics are still very high. Women also face a lot of social stigma for doing what were traditionally thought of as 'men's jobs.' Women who want to focus on their careers get criticised because they aren't being a 'good mother.' It is the same thing with single mothers as well.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by folluber)
    You purposefully changed his quote. That's rather dishonest, no?
    I shortened two sentences together for the sake of being succinct. How the **** did my shortening change his meaning in any way?


    Straws. Clutching.

    "Lots of people hate feminists, and many feminists actually do act in a way that makes the hate justified"

    is no different to-

    "many feminists behave in a way which makes [hate towards] them justified""
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Break up or unrequited love?
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.