Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 28

Author Topic: [insert gender-related title here!]: Beware the Evil Philosiphers version  (Read 28185 times)

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2014, 04:14:09 pm »

More agressive behaviour in men would come to mind...
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Mr. Strange

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2014, 07:37:31 pm »

Yay, for once I have something relevant to contribute!

From what I've seen of the restaurant bussiness from the last ten years or so, there's clear division between places with majority men and those with majority women (I'm talking about around 9/10 majority here), and that's in how stressfull the workplace is. Even back in school most students chose courses and internship places (closest translation I can come up with) along those lines, guys choose mostly à la carte restaurants where you work during the evenings and the weekends, while girls usually picked small caffee or cafeteria that needed to work during the weekdays. Our school had a competitive team of five and only one of them was a girl, despite some 2/3 of all students and all of our teachers being women. Same division comes up even stronger when I think about the people who have worked for years in kitchen, mostly man (and the odd woman) staff in restaurants "love" the hectic pace and generally hate boring rutine work that comes with the other line, where mostly woman (with the odd man thrown in to the mix) staff prefers predictable schedule and workload that comes with it following office hours and hate the chaotic and unpredictable life of working in à la carte restaurants.
Saying that both genders can do both lines is true, but apparently for the most part people don't want to.
Logged
Then you get cities like Paris where you should basically just kill yourself already.

You won’t have to think anymore: it’ll be just like having fun!

Dutchling

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ridin' with Biden
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2014, 07:40:25 pm »

I recall a study which basically concluded that 99% percent of males are physically stronger than the average female.

As I can't seem to find it right now, consider this a very wordy PTW.
Logged

Eagle_eye

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2014, 09:18:23 pm »

Why do we try to differentiate between biology and (deeply engrained) culture, anyway?

Because culture can be fixed far more easily than biology. We should try to minimize differences between people, but shouldn't waste our effort on things we don't have the ability at present to change.

Quote
Wow, you must live in a very strange western world compared to everyone else.

Not really. Aside from unskilled manual labor, which is continuing to decline in economic importance, and fighting, which isn't necessary at all, strength really isn't that important.

Quote
Also in a psychological one if you're calling basic differences at a negligible level.

That doesn't quite make sense, but if I'm interpreting it correctly: my point is that we have no evidence of any fundamental differences. We have evidence of differences, but none that are unambiguously not the result of cultural or environmental influences.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2014, 09:21:39 pm by Eagle_eye »
Logged

scriver

  • Bay Watcher
  • City streets ain't got much pity
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2014, 12:55:08 am »

Our dimorphism is rather low compared to most apes. The differences are mostly irrelevant; no matter what you can do well, there's at least one man and one woman who can kick your ass at it (barring a few very specific things, like baby-making).
Or anything that is physically demanding, which is not a very specific thing. In the Western world at least, there aren't many physically demanding jobs outside of the emergency/armed services though, so it is little noticed. There is also the notion that even our preferences of careers and many of our lifestyle choices are instinctively based on our gender, which goes at some length to explain why countries like Norway and Sweden still manage to get the traditional split of genders to careers in spite of it micromanaging its efforts with the zeal of a DF player to get a 50/50 representation in all fields.

1. Neither Sweden nor Norway "micromanages its efforts with the zeal of a DF player to get a 50/50 representation in all fields".

2. Where gender roles are discouraged, they're fighting against tradition. Do you understand why the stayed going "let's try to close the gender gap a little" won't just up and turn generations-old memes irrelevant?
Logged
Love, scriver~

RangerCado

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2014, 01:35:09 am »

I recall a study which basically concluded that 99% percent of males are physically stronger than the average female.

As I can't seem to find it right now, consider this a very wordy PTW.
There is a small truth to this.

THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION, its the opinion of society.

In general, Men are born slightly stronger in body then Women. Now add in what kids of both genders stereotypically do at a young age. (3-12) Men go towards sports more cause their dads encourage it, while Women will play dress up or princess or pretend with dolls.
Women however, are born slightly more agile and dexterous. This relates to later in life (13-20) when women begin doing gymnastics and Yoga while Men begin playing sports for their school teams that are generally quite physical.

This is where that old stereotyping and sexism comes from.

MY PERSONAL OPINION

Genetically, yes, Men are slightly stronger at birth, Women slightly more agile. This is ONLY at birth, and only an in general however as there will always be differences in people. Depending on what your parents influence you to do early in your life, (Sports, dolls, coloring, swimming) will determine your early physical abilities. Women can, however, be just as strong as Men at any physical activity if they work towards it, just like how the Man would have to work to be as strong as the Woman.

Both genders are equal in their ability to attain great strength and/or dexterity, and should be seen as equals by the opposite gender. The only thing one gender is better at AT ALL then the other, is that women are better at withstanding pain. This is proven both genetically, and in practice, most notably of the act of child birth, which is essentially trying to force a small watermelon through a Toonie sized hole.

That is the only difference in physical abilities between Men and Women, pain tolerance. Anything else you think may be true, can easily be fixed by some training and practice.
Logged
The best ship is the one where one of them is literally allergic to the other~
Quote from: NakaTeleeli
"A room ain't messy less you can't find nothin!"
[/quote]

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2014, 03:13:17 am »

Why do we try to differentiate between biology and (deeply engrained) culture, anyway?

Because culture can be fixed far more easily than biology. We should try to minimize differences between people, but shouldn't waste our effort on things we don't have the ability at present to change.

Quote
Wow, you must live in a very strange western world compared to everyone else.

Not really. Aside from unskilled manual labor, which is continuing to decline in economic importance, and fighting, which isn't necessary at all, strength really isn't that important.
1) Could you provide an argument for the thesis that all culturally induced behaviours* need to be fixed? Look a few posts back - I already said something about that Rousseau-like fallacy...
2) Construction comes to mind, and jobs in retailing, where you have to lift and move heavy crates and such; security services, the police, the army generally need strong people; craftsmen (and -women :P) also need physical strength - the list just goes on and on. Strength isn't an absolute requirement in most of these fields, but the need for manual labor in our modern economy should not be underestimated.

*As opposed to only harmful ones, like wife-burning and homophobia.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

alexandertnt

  • Bay Watcher
  • (map 'list (lambda (post) (+ post awesome)) posts)
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #22 on: April 11, 2014, 03:48:26 am »

Chivalry? Doing something to help someone is good, but when you do it because they are a women its pushing this idea that women are less capable of fending for themselves then men, regardless of their actual situations.
Logged
This is when I imagine the hilarity which may happen if certain things are glichy. Such as targeting your own body parts to eat.

You eat your own head
YOU HAVE BEEN STRUCK DOWN!

aenri

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #23 on: April 11, 2014, 05:14:16 am »

Chivalry? Doing something to help someone is good, but when you do it because they are a women its pushing this idea that women are less capable of fending for themselves then men, regardless of their actual situations.

What? I give up my seat in bus for pregnant women and for old people, precisely because they are pregnant/elderly. I wouldn't give up my seat to man, if they weren't visibly old. I don't see any problem at all of giving up seat/holding the door for women, precisely because they are women. How can you even extrapolate that by holding a door for women, I'm pushing the idea that women are less capable of fending for themselves?
I consider such things as politeness, such as removing your cap when entering buildings.
Logged

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #24 on: April 11, 2014, 05:36:36 am »

1) Could you provide an argument for the thesis that all culturally induced behaviours* need to be fixed? ...

*As opposed to only harmful ones, like wife-burning and homophobia.
Define harmful for me.

Your examples suggest that you find both direct, physically harmful and systematic discrimination and prejudice 'harmful'. Surely it's not a huge leap to see that cultural induced behaviours that re-enforce sexist ideas and views of women are harmful in this latter sense?

The stereotyped assumptions that women can't cope and don't want to carry out traditionally male jobs for whatever reasons are explicitly harmful to the women who can cope and do want to enter those fields. The idea that certain fields should be accepted as boy's clubs because of some unsupported assumption about the average woman is one of the factors that keeps these fields boy's clubs.

As far as physical labour goes, there seems to be a double standard. Traditional physical labour jobs are still heavily male dominated, even if they are relatively minimal as far as strength requirements go (hell, I've done a primarily physical labour job when I was heavily out of shape). More recent jobs with substantial physical components, or components not always recognised as physical, often trend female.

Compare the work I did at Parcelforce (heavily male gendered) to a woman working at Amazon in a warehouse.

My job was in a traditional, heavily unionised industry with dozens of safety and health regulations. There were limits on the weights we could lift, even if they were occasionally ignored. We generally asked for and got help lifting anything particularly heavy (unless wanting to show off), and the majority of particularly heavy items were labelled correctly. There were frequent breaks throughout a shift, generally determined by the natural work flow but enforced by management if no gaps appeared. Shift managers were generally on the line with everyone else. Protective clothing was required and could be supplied if needed. While women were drivers, none worked in the warehouse as that was seen as a physical job. Most of the physical labour was moving objects between a (height and length adjustable) boom and cages or piles on the ground/truck, maybe carrying them for two or three steps. There were some time pressures when unloading trucks, but often the loaders (easily most physically demanding part, which I was generally dumped into as a short term temp) were going too fast for the sorters down the line.

Amazon pickers do much the same thing (although maybe with fewer packages that exceed the 10-20kg range; we handled Amazon packages and they were generally single books/dvds, but there were frequent heavier exceptions) except the heights they are picking objects from are, by all accounts, not controlled. They also have far fewer breaks and have to walk far, far further. According to reports their safety equipment supplied was insufficient for the demands of the job, if present at all. There doesn't seem to have been any real assumptions either from the employers or employees as to whether it's a job for men or women, and the early articles I saw about it were a rough split in complaints about conditions from men and women.

Now I've known dozens of women who were more than capable of carrying out the Parcelforce job. I don't imagine that any of them would apply for or get such work, even if unemployed and in need of money. At the same time the Amazon job sounds far more demanding and physically damaging. A decent chunk of that is the lack of regulation and safety requirements, but the general layout of the job (walking to collect shelved items) is likely to be inherently more exhausting than the work I did. Given the choice I'd probably sign back up at Parcelforce over doing the Amazon work, as that sort of labour builds strength better than reaching and excess walking. Anyone, male or female, who managed that Amazon work could easily do 99% of the Parcelforce work, and certainly anything that some of the younger guys (we had 16 year olds working there at times...) could manage. The differences seem to be entirely attitudes towards the job and established workforce, which kinda shits on the people who aren't accepted into the frankly safer work.
Logged

alexandertnt

  • Bay Watcher
  • (map 'list (lambda (post) (+ post awesome)) posts)
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #25 on: April 11, 2014, 05:45:55 am »

Quote
How can you even extrapolate that by holding a door for women, I'm pushing the idea that women are less capable of fending for themselves?

*sigh*

I never said that, I never said these acts were bad. Ever.

I said the reasoning behind the acts can be ultimately harmful. Helping women because they are women (rather than because they need help, or just to help a person) is implying that women are in need of special treatment relative to men.

I do not give up my seat on a bus to elderly people and pregnent women because they are elderly and pregnant, I do it because they have trouble standing and the seat will benefit them much more than it will me. Likewise, I would not give up my seat to a women because they are a women, I would give it up because its a nice thing to do to people, and would be just as happy doing it for a man.
Logged
This is when I imagine the hilarity which may happen if certain things are glichy. Such as targeting your own body parts to eat.

You eat your own head
YOU HAVE BEEN STRUCK DOWN!

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #26 on: April 11, 2014, 02:38:41 pm »

1. Neither Sweden nor Norway "micromanages its efforts with the zeal of a DF player to get a 50/50 representation in all fields".
Oh yeah, why don't we suck all the emotion out of what we say. I could just as well say Norway and Sweden are keen on this sort of shit, but that just isn't as fun.

2. Where gender roles are discouraged, they're fighting against tradition. Do you understand why the stayed going "let's try to close the gender gap a little" won't just up and turn generations-old memes irrelevant?
I'm not quite sure what this sentence means. Could you rephrase that?

Both genders are equal in their ability to attain great strength and/or dexterity
No

Twi

  • Bay Watcher
  • ✨heterotemporality✨
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #27 on: April 11, 2014, 02:48:02 pm »

Dang it, wrong topic. You're not the happy thread!
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #28 on: April 11, 2014, 04:35:17 pm »

It's not that men will be strong and women won't, it's just that the hormones we produce have effects which change the balance one way or the other. Maybe drastically
I just don't get this forum sometimes. Most of you are a helluva lot smarter than me, yet can't praise the wonders of biology with a conviction to terrify the fiercest general.

Before puberty children are on a superficial level physically similar - androgynous even. Then puberty happens. Estrogen and testosterone affect the development of the skeleton, they affect the rate of muscle growth (and even where the muscle is actually developed, hence why men doing squats results in dench legs and women doing squats results in toned legs and butts), deeper/same pitch voices as compared to childhood, fat deposits in the breasts or lack thereof, body stature and body size e.t.c. because the list goes on.

I mean really? Is sociology so preeminent in America that people give it precedence over biology, or is it just here? Because, again, I stress that people here were trying to explain the sexual dimorphism of our species through society, as if society was capable of affecting the development of your pelvis or it was intentionally lowering the muscle development of women somehow to keep women "weak and frail." THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT WAS BEING SAID. The average male baby is born with 3x more testosterone than a female baby. The average adult male has 7 to 8x more testosterone than their female counterpart. Testosterone is a steroid hormone. It doesn't "maybe" affect muscle development;
Quote
This is ONLY at birth, and only an in general however as there will always be differences in people. Depending on what your parents influence you to do early in your life, (Sports, dolls, coloring, swimming) will determine your early physical abilities. Women can, however, be just as strong as Men at any physical activity if they work towards it, just like how the Man would have to work to be as strong as the Woman.
Is bullshit;
Quote
Not really. Aside from unskilled manual labor, which is continuing to decline in economic importance, and fighting, which isn't necessary at all, strength really isn't that important.
Is naive, and I am so done. You lot bicker about your income differences and your insultingly helpful door opening, but don't you dare insult biology like this. Unless you stronk like Tatiana Kashirina and you're a woman, the chances are overwhelmingly against you that you won't be as good as a man in a physically demanding job. Hence the over representation of men in physically demanding labours, hence the lowering of entry standards in militaries to even allow the average woman to work there. It is a nice idea that you can be as good as anyone if you work hard enough, and sure you can probably beat some ungrateful shit who doesn't work as hard as you even if they've got some natural talent for whatever it is they're doing. But if they work hard and have the natural affinity? Just do your best, and enjoy what you do.
Also whoever was talking about women being more agile from birth; gross motor skills develop quicker in males than females, and that's from childhood. Females develop better fine motor skills.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2014, 04:36:48 pm by Loud Whispers »
Logged

scriver

  • Bay Watcher
  • City streets ain't got much pity
    • View Profile
Re: [insert gender-related title here!]
« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2014, 06:42:13 am »

1. Neither Sweden nor Norway "micromanages its efforts with the zeal of a DF player to get a 50/50 representation in all fields".
Oh yeah, why don't we suck all the emotion out of what we say. I could just as well say Norway and Sweden are keen on this sort of shit, but that just isn't as fun.

2. Where gender roles are discouraged, they're fighting against tradition. Do you understand why the state going "let's try to close the gender gap a little" won't just up and turn generations-old memes irrelevant?
I'm not quite sure what this sentence means. Could you rephrase that?

1. A gross distortion of reality is not "emotional speak".

2. I fixed the bolded typo. Can you understand it now?
Logged
Love, scriver~
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 28