Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kaijyuu]

Don't those piercings heal over eventually if you stop wearing earrings? Though I imagine it might leave some nasty scarring.



Anyway, re: focusing on issues. There are only two real justifications I can see for "focusing" when discussing social issues like this.

1) If we're simply conveying information, it's best to talk about related things rather than jumping all over the place. If you're studying history, you might focus on the roman empire for a while before going to ancient china, not jump around the world at random. Similarly, if you're discussing social problems, you'll probably want to stick to one group at a time, eg: women, gays, etc.

2) Avoiding dismissals. "Someone else has it worse," "similar things happen to everybody," and all that stupidity. If I'm discussing male circumcision, I don't want someone to barge in and bring up female circumcision to dismiss the male type as irrelevant. There's a case to be made for triage (deal with the worst and/or solvable problems first), but generally there are a lot of people who bring up irrelevant things simply to dismiss valid complaints.


On the plus side of bringing up other groups, we can find common ground and common enemies. There are many things that hurt women more than men, but bringing up the things that affect men too can add people to your cause. Whether that's appropriate or not depends on the situation (probably not all that appropriate for this thread, barring a few things).

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Don't those piercings heal over eventually if you stop wearing earrings? Though I imagine it might leave some nasty scarring.

Only if they're fresh. Once skin has grown through the wound it is permanent. That's ears, anyway. I think there are some piercings that will always eventually seal if they aren't used.

[kaijyuu]

Absolutely against it myself, then. Would've been even if it just left a scar, but that's even worse.

[penguinofhonor]

No, they definitely can seal back up after they've healed all the way through. It just takes years to happen. And there will always be a scar.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't see how that could happen. Once it's skinned over, what would trigger the healing process? I suppose you could always damage the inside so it heals together, but aside from that...

[Vector]

I've had earrings for almost a year and leaving them out for 24 hours can still lead to nontrivial closing.  I don't know why, but that's how they are.

[penguinofhonor]

I'm not sure. I can only take my friend's word that women came in every once in a while because their ears had sealed up. Mostly older women, so I think it takes quite a few years.

[Max White]

Regardless, piercings will 'close' in that the hole itself becomes smaller and some what noticeable over time... Unless you manage to rip the ear so that it is a tear going to the edge...

We know what kids are like, I'm willing to bet the risk of a serious tear at some point is very high.

[Vector]

There is a reason why I pretty much don't wear anything but studs.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Regardless, piercings will 'close' in that the hole itself becomes smaller and some what noticeable over time... Unless you manage to rip the ear so that it is a tear going to the edge...

We know what kids are like, I'm willing to bet the risk of a serious tear at some point is very high.

I think you are significantly underestimating both the force and willpower necessary to tear your earlobe.

I know this in part from the story my mother told me about how she got her "ghetto piercing" alongside the two professionally done ones. Suffice it to say she and her friends only ever tried to play piercing artist once.

[Blargityblarg]

A friend of mine had her industrial torn out; that's a straight bar that pierces the upper curve of your ear twice.

[Neonivek]

There's a case to be made for triage (deal with the worst and/or solvable problems first), but generally there are a lot of people who bring up irrelevant things simply to dismiss valid complaints.

No, not in this case. We are not dealing with very limited resources and ability to act... which is what triage is for.

Which leads back into my statement that a lot of people are treating this like some sort of game show where only one group can win equality.

[DJ]

Part of the problem is that those positive examples are

a. few and far between, thanks to centuries of oppression

b. often quietly forgotten about even when they do exist (see above)

So yes, you're right that saying technical fields in general are "entirely closed to women" is ridiculous, but being in it is still a ridiculous uphill struggle (which is what I think they usually mean when they say the fields are entirely closed--imprecise language, tsk tsk).  I think mentioning the above, and mentioning it loudly, is necessary because many people simply don't know the facts.  It's important in some contexts to say "X woman discovered the universe is mostly hydrogen" AND "we never mention her name in textbooks" because there remains the question--exactly how many of us are still being forgotten about?

(Hell, I don't even remember her name)

Personally, I think we need to build better support systems at the middle school through university levels.  I would also recommend more sensitivity training for grad students in university technical fields, because seriously, I don't usually get that much bullshit from professors (who as mentioned had to have some of that training themselves), but the graduate students I've had to deal with have all made my life miserable in a sexist-flavored sort of a way.

What I'm trying to say is this, I guess: I think that trying to have faith that women can become more than they've shown themselves to be and giving them resources to build those positive examples, behaving like the community actually thought they could be worth something, would go a really, really long way.

This is exactly the glass half empty attitude I'm talking about. Yeah, historically there have been few examples, thanks to the state of women's rights. But in the last century or so there have been lots, and it'd be more productive to highlight these than the negative examples. Ie, raise the awareness about that scientist who proved that the Universe is mostly hydrogen, or awareness about the ENIAC programming team. As far as gaming is concerned, it's better to talk about how Kerrigan is basically a grimdark Messiah rather than how her Zerg form has high heels. Of course, talking just about the good is a bit dishonest, but so is talking just about the bad.

And it's not like being a man gives you automatic respect. We all know about all the bullshit that Tesla had to endure. Closer to home, since you're a mathematician, Euler was frequently mocked by Voltaire on Frederick the Great's court, and Frederick himself made fun of his medical condition by calling him "Cyclops". If you give people half a chance to walk over you they will, no matter your gender. It's just that humans are hierarchical creatures, and dragging others down is an effective way to enhance one's own relative social status. Science is an especially cut-throat field when it comes to this.

So yeah, I believe it's ultimately about the self-confidence. My perception is coloured by my own family, of course, but I still think it's relevant for getting a more complete picture. My sister is the most self-confident and outgoing of my parent's children, and she did the best for herself. My brother's a construction worker, I'm a postman, and she is the head of an accounting office. The trick is that she stands up for herself. Conversely, I'm not the most self-confident guy. Before the post office, I was working in a computer shops, and my coworker (who was a woman, but that's not really relevant) basically bullied me into hiding the money from computer repairs and splitting it between us (even though I did all the actual repairing), by telling me to "grow some balls" and generally questioning my masculinity. Guess who gets more respect in general, my sister or me?

[Vector]

There's a big difference between "rejected for her new and striking ideas" and "rejected for doing the same thing as everyone else," though.  The story of the average male genius does not include being asked if they took the course previously over the display of marginal competence; nor are most men, to my knowledge, talked down to after having demonstrated mastery of a subject.

I have had multiple young fellows, upon hearing that I'm a junior or senior in math (note: these people, comparatively, have no math background), decide that now is the time to inform me at length about just who Godel was, or the value of undergrad research (minimal, for pure math majors!); it doesn't matter how many times I take the conversation from them and start telling the story in considerably more detail or attempt to change the subject, they keep on explaining with a pedagogical tone.  I have of course also had teachers treat me like a surprising little insect if I happen to know more than other folks.  The young men are not treated this way.

But anyway.

[Putnam]

Remember: giving counter-examples means absolutely, incontrovertibly nothing when we're talking about trends, so saying "but Marie Curie" doesn't help anyone.