Print

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

[Tiruin]

. . .I'm pretty happy I don't live in that kind of society.

I still wonder why there are such things as gender discrimination, wonder why because I don't see these things in my everyday life. Little to none of those notes (in that documentary) exist here. [Like, rape jokes. Wat. :v]

I'm really wondering if its the values inculcated by the..culture(?) or the views people have that are forwarding this.

[Graknorke]

I'm really wondering if its the values inculcated by the..culture(?) or the views people have that are forwarding this.

A culture is made of people. Those two things are the same.

[Ogdibus]

Yeah, peoples' behavior is heavily dependent on culture, but people's behavior is also what constitutes and perpetuates culture.  Societies and culture are interdependent systems.

I've see the stuff in the video a lot.  Consciously misogynist men will show their true colors more readily when they think that they are in the exclusive company of like minded men.  Otherwise, they tend to act "normal".  It's possible to spend most of your life out of contact with these people, but for some, they seem to be everywhere.

I would have liked to see something about internalized misogyny in there.

[WoobMonkey]

Wow, 6 pages in, and nobody has yet mentioned that what's being argued here is sex, and not gender?

'Gender' is a linguistic term, applicable to many (predominately Latin-derived) languages which differentiate nouns into feminine/masculine/neutral.

'Sex' relates to one's genitalia, and hormonal balance, as well as identification with such.

The divide between the usage of these terms seems (caveat: seems) to closely follow the type of education the speaker has; the 'soft' (read: NON) sciences are much more likely to confuse the two, whenever and wherever it's politically expedient.

Spoiler: potential triggers? (click to show/hide)

I have very strong opinions on the matter of sexual equality, and can back them with statistical, legal, and historical evidence.  However, the lack of precision in the usage of terms demonstrates, in my view, the utter futility of presenting them here.

[Tiruin]

Wow, 6 pages in, and nobody has yet mentioned that what's being argued here is sex, and not gender?

. . .Really?!
I was basing it more on the title given that it specifically mentioned...gender :x
Anyway, glad to see someone with backing on sexual equality. *high-five*

[Helgoland]

Loads of other languages don't have that distinction - I often use the incorrect word because of that.

Also, what was being discussed here was how differences between the sexes influence gender stereotypes.

[WoobMonkey]

Loads of other languages don't have that distinction - I often use the incorrect word because of that.

Also, what was being discussed here was how differences between the sexes influence gender stereotypes.

Oh, I get it.  Thing is, 'gender' stereotypes aren't a thing, outside of the not-so-hallowed halls of Women's Studies classes.  I'm well aware that many languages make no such distinction - we're using one, right now.

Flame-bait though it may be, I offer the position that the sexes are equal, at least in the West.  Men have advantages in certain areas of life; women in others.  On the whole, there is plenty of room for improvement for all of humanity, regardless of genitalia; however this particular debate is one of the most futile, divisive, and ultimately destructive ones on the cultural radar.

[Helgoland]

I offer the position that the sexes are equal, at least in the West.  Men have advantages in certain areas of life; women in others.  On the whole, there is plenty of room for improvement for all of humanity, regardless of genitalia; however this particular debate is one of the most futile, divisive, and ultimately destructive ones on the cultural radar.

Aren't these contradictory?

[Graknorke]

I offer the position that the sexes are equal, at least in the West.  Men have advantages in certain areas of life; women in others.  On the whole, there is plenty of room for improvement for all of humanity, regardless of genitalia; however this particular debate is one of the most futile, divisive, and ultimately destructive ones on the cultural radar.

Aren't these contradictory?

Equal as opposed to identical.

[WoobMonkey]

Equal as opposed to identical.

The nail has been struck, directly on the top of the dome.

[Helgoland]

'Equal' is ill-defined, then: Please elaborate. Equal before the law? Equal economically? Equal in equine matters? Because from what I've heard, waaay more girls than boys want a pony.

[WoobMonkey]

'Equal' is ill-defined, then: Please elaborate. Equal before the law? Equal economically? Equal in equine matters? Because from what I've heard, waaay more girls than boys want a pony.

Equal before the law?  No.  Women, on the whole, receive roughly 1/2 the sentence men do, as punishment for equivalent crimes.

Economically?  No.  Men tend to earn more; women have more actual spending power.

In equine matters?  I think it best to ignore the sarcasm implied, here.

Equal, in this context, meaning: on the whole, when all advantages, disadvantages, and neutral aspects are summed, neither sex has any clear-cut dominance in the cultural spectrum.  Sex is not the dividing line in human affairs.  I posit that the base measure of equality in society is the ability to wield power; on that front, neither sex is leading the other.

[Helgoland]

Sex is not the dividing line in human affairs.

You imply that there can only be one: Wouldn't you agree, though, that there are field- and gender-specific advantages, and that a woman who wants to go into a male-dominated field could care less that she faces fewer difficulties in becoming a hairdresser than a man similar to her?
Less verbose: Do you think gender-specific advantages and disadvantages are okay as long as they're distributed evenly? That idea has some weeeird implications.

[WoobMonkey]

Sex is not the dividing line in human affairs.

You imply that there can only be one: Wouldn't you agree, though, that there are field- and gender-specific advantages, and that a woman who wants to go into a male-dominated field could care less that she faces fewer difficulties in becoming a hairdresser than a man similar to her?
Less verbose: Do you think gender-specific advantages and disadvantages are okay as long as they're distributed evenly? That idea has some weeeird implications.

And this is why I avoid these discussions, with less-than serious people.

There is a strong feeling of antipathy bleeding from your posts, sir or madam.  Or are you, perhaps, simply being willfully obtuse?

Far less insulting examples of female-dominated fields:

Medicine, law, education, management, accounting. . . .

Examples of male-dominated fields:

Any job class where 'next of kin' is an important line in the application.

Actually, y'know what?  I'm out.  This is still futile.  Too much ideological hyperbole comes as baggage in these discussions.

[Helgoland]

Sorry, my English is pretty bad right now - I'm serious, though, but I probably need to put more effort into my posts.

Let's use the military as an example of a classical male-dominated field: Any women who's planning to become a soldier encounters difficulties that none of her future male comrades have to face, such as ill-fitting combat gear. (Cracked.com, I know...)
I'm sure there are similar gender-flipped (sex-flipped?) examples; I can't think of any right now, though. And the same pattern repeats itself in any field strongly dominated by a certain gender.
Of course, these issues are minor compared to the discrimination that was commonplace only a couple of decades ago, and they aren't an overly pressing problem compared to various other issues. But I still think that ultimately these barriers have to go as well - because they're unfair to the individual.

(I'm male, by the way - look through the last few pages to see me arguing the same point against the other side )