quote:Thats wrong, most of the time, if a man feels challenged by a woman, he tries to put her down as much as he can, guess this is what is happening right now.
Now, see there is a real life example of the dangerous stereotyping that exaggeration by feminism can cause.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exageration?? This happens MOST of the time, but not always. I see no exageration in that. You're a guy right?
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tres, I'm sorry but in engineering, even if you DON'T have kids because you don't want them, and never use an ounce of maternity leave and even if you have equal qualifications to a man, very frequently you get paid less. I strongly suspect this is true of me in my own company but I can't force the records disclosure outside of a lawsuit to prove it.
quote: Thats wrong, most of the time, if a man feels challenged by a woman, he tries to put her down as much as he can, guess this is what is happening right now. Why is it that men always want to rule women with the thumb? Why this need to show you're superior to us?
And you're saying MEN are sexist?
In that case, Why are all women so unreasonable?
Obviously, the above statement is bigoted and sexist, but comparable to the one you made.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
From the 2003 Census Data, as a white woman 25 or over with a Doctorate Degree (which I hope to be some day), mean income is $59,678. If I were male, with the same age, ethnicity, and education, suddenly I'm worth $100,790.
Those are statistics for "alone or in combination." As a single female, I'd be worth almost an extra $100.
I'm sure it's all in my head. Maybe it's just that time of the month, right?
Posts: 3956 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh well, then I think you are a guy... i didn't mean it to be sexist, I meant it in a way that shows how men's natural impulses are. We girls get it too, but generally are less obvious about it. Its the general stuff about Darwinism, survival of the fittest. So therefore, anyone would naturally try to be his or her best so that they can show how superior they are or just to feel that way. And if its not abot how superior you are, its about just feeling that you're at least competent to those around you. If its not to feel more, its to feel or be equal at least.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Celia, we all already addressed that. Women are paid less. It's unfortunate, and it's something that everyone should strive against, but it's not like anybody here is ignoring that.
What we're talking about is that Altariel thinks that men must show their superiority most of the time. I think that is an incredibly naive viewpoint.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: I didn't mean it to be sexist, I meant it in a way that shows how men's natural impulses are. We girls get it too, but generally are less obvious about it.
You say didn't mean to be sexist, and there you spouting off sexism again! Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe I just grew up in a liberal area. Or maybe it was my mother (who, as a stay-at-home mom with an MBA, considers herself a feminist...and yet still manages to have a wonderful relationship with my father and wouldn't trade her kids or her decision to stop working for anything).
But I never really thought "feminism" was a dirty word. And that's how it's getting treated here. Honestly, people. Feminism works for women's rights. What could possibly be wrong with that?
Yes, there are certainly particular feminists (I would call them extremists, same way moderate Muslims call many Islamists extremists) who give the movement a bad name. But saying all of feminism is bad because of a few tainted voices is like saying every Muslim is as bad as al-Qaeda.
There are inequalities. There will always be inequalities. And as long as I'm around, I'm going to try and see it it that there is someone somewhere working to correct them. Just because things are "equal" now (which, honestly, I think we've proved they're not) does not mean they will always be equal. The ACLU slogan is "Because Freedom Cannot Protect Itself." Whether or not you agree with every stand/vendetta the ACLU takes, you must admit that their cause is a noble one: protecting civil liberties, the very foundation of our nation.
I believe the same attitude also applies toward feminism. As long as there are biological differences between men and women, there is someone, somewhere thinking he is better than the woman he works with or the woman he is married to or even the woman he fathered. The reason feminism is necessary is because our society has made these differences of opinion systemic -- we have institutionalized them. Yes, much progress has been made. But even if things do become equal, we are still biologically different, and therein lies the potential for abuse.
If you want the same sort of groups advocating men's rights, then by all means, go ahead.
But I would argue that feminism will always be necessary, and that it will never, ever be irrelevant.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:From the 2003 Census Data, as a white woman 25 or over with a Doctorate Degree (which I hope to be some day), mean income is $59,678. If I were male, with the same age, ethnicity, and education, suddenly I'm worth $100,790.
Yes, but that ignores what field the doctorate is in. For instance, a medical doctor is likely paid more than principal, even though both have doctorates. And as I said before, females are more prevelant in many of the lower paying fields, so we should expect a much lower average.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: How strange, I'm pretty certain I've seen studies of particular fields, such as academia, in which women are consistently paid less. More than 9 months (and less than that is taken) of not obtaining raises woudl result in.
-fugu13
quote: Tres, I'm sorry but in engineering, even if you DON'T have kids because you don't want them, and never use an ounce of maternity leave and even if you have equal qualifications to a man, very frequently you get paid less.
quote:Yes, but that ignores what field the doctorate is in. For instance, a medical doctor is likely paid more than principal, even though both have doctorates. And as I said before, females are more prevelant in many of the lower paying fields, so we should expect a much lower average.
Tres, I would argue that this statement is sexist in and of itself. Why?
Because women often enter fields that have been traditionally dominated by women. And fields traditionally dominated by women have been lower-paid because they have been dominated by women.
Take teaching, for example. In the United States, teaching is a relatively low-paid job that carries with it little prestige or respect (from the general public, anyway). In the U.S., teaching is a field that has traditionally been dominated by women.
In Europe, teaching is one of the best paid jobs around. And that's because in Europe, teaching has been a historically male profession.
Honestly, Tres, you're grasping at straws here. The data is there, the anecdotes are there, and the history is there. I don't really understand where you're coming from.
[ April 27, 2004, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: Kasie H ]
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Feminism works for women's rights. What could possibly be wrong with that?
Well let's put it this way: Pro-life groups work for the rights of fetuses, so what could possibly ever be wrong with them?
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
P.S. -- I would note there are some pro-life groups who blow up abortion clinics/kill abortion doctors. Can't think of the last time a feminist group did that....
[ April 27, 2004, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: Kasie H ]
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: which, honestly, I think we've proved they're not
We have proven that men are equal under the eyes of the law.
quote: As long as there are biological differences between men and women, there is someone, somewhere thinking he is better than the woman he works with or the woman he is married to or even the woman he fathered.
So your goals is to show chauvinist men the error of their ways. Good luck...
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Haven't we been over this in the other thread?
No, we argued about the morality of abortion, not the damage that pro-life movements cause, and I think the analogy is still a valid one that you should have an answer to.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Haven't we been over this in the other thread?
No, we argued about the morality of abortion, not the damage that pro-life movements cause, and I think the analogy is still a valid one that you should have an answer to.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Well let's put it this way: Pro-life groups work for the rights of fetuses, so what could possibly ever be wrong with them?
The issue on abortion is whether fetuses are people or not: pro-life says yes, pro-choice says no. Most of the people I've met are pretty clear about women being people.
quote: Haven't we been over this in the other thread?
No, we argued about the morality of abortion, not the damage that pro-life movements cause, and I think the analogy is still a valid one that you should have an answer to.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nick, I've never said I didn't think pro-life groups should be able to have their say. I can be freely, loudly, and obnoxiously pro-choice, and they can be freely, loudly, and obnoxiously pro-life. That's the beauty of democracy.
If you want to go and yell freely, loudly, and obnoxiously that women should be treated as less then men, go right ahead.
Good luck getting anyone to listen.
----
Seriously, though....do you have a substantitve answer to the substance of my argument, not to just protests to what you see as inflammatory bits and pieces, or demands that I answer more questions?
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nick, I'm addressing the people who continue to disagree with those statements, and trying to do so with fact. Here, like this:
Tres: Here's some data from University of Wisconsin on what recent graduates are earning, broken down by degree and gender. I know the first thing you're going to say is "See, it's not that bad," but my problem is that it exists at all. The earnings section starts on page 3. Here are some highlights:
quote: The average salary for recent graduates in engineering is $41,300. Recent women engineering graduates earn $38,300 while their male counterparts earn a salary of $41,800.
quote:1999 female graduates earn 85 percent of what their male counterparts earn. Female graduates in the fields of nursing, engineering and education, however, earn over 90 percent of the wages for males.
Yes, a gap exists, yes the gap is narrowing, but it is rediculous to not acknowledge it, and would be foolish to consider it a battle already won until it is equal.
Or should I just be happy I'm not a liberal arts major, where the gap is the largest, and just let those girls fend for themselves?
quote: Why is it that men always want to rule women with the thumb? Why this need to show you're superior to us?
Men don't want to just rule women. They want to rule other men as well. And animals, and plants, and the weather, and the atom, and the human genome, and skynet, and ...
posted
I would I had an argument with the rest of the quote, but included all the relevant parts.
So basically, the only reason that feminism is still around is because women are paid less (a good thing to fight to change), and to end the catcalls when you walk down the street?
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Because women often enter fields that have been traditionally dominated by women. And fields traditionally dominated by women have been lower-paid because they have been dominated by women.
You don't think supply and demand have anything to do with it? Come on now...
quote:Take teaching, for example. In the United States, teaching is a relatively low-paid job that carries with it little prestige or respect (from the general public, anyway). In the U.S., teaching is a field that has traditionally been dominated by women.
What about teaching at the college level? It has always been male-dominated, yet it remains low-paying. If your theory was correct, that field should be much more higher-paying. Is it not possible that teaching is a low-paying job around here because people just aren't willing to pay a lot more to be taught, or because lots of people are willing to give up high salaries to be teachers?
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Becuase you're confusing those with actual rights. You're saying women are not equal to men. Well, they are. But there will always be chauvinists and people who pay women less for bigoted reasons. Has there ever been a time without bigotry anywhere in history? While is a valiant and worthwhile fight to try to end it, in the end, it's all rather futile.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a boss once that wouldn't take me seriously because he said I thought I was "cute with cute hair" or something stupid like that. No legal action in the WORLD would make that man realize that I had brains, even if I was a woman. What he needed was a kick in the pants and to have me snatch the next promotion from him.
People who hold these lame viewpoints need to be shown over and over again how wrong they are. That's the ONLY way to fix it. If a dude is a chavenist, what makes you think changing laws will change his mind? There isn't a law in the world that could have forced that man to see me as more than a cute girl with "cute hair".
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then there are more important reasons for Feminism.
Right now our country is recieving thousands and thousands of immigrants, legal and illegal, from around the world, many from places where women's rights are much less, or even non-existant. They are coming from places where the debate isn't whether a woman should get to vote, but whether a woman has a soul.
These immigrants are setting up businesses in this country, building lives, sharing ideals. Rates of human trafficing (slavery) are up, especially in the "sex Industry" where truckloads of "mail order brides" and other prostitutes work abused by the men in their lives...men who see women as profit centers and resources and animals.
The women they import expect this treatment, and the men expect the women here to behave the same, accepting the beatings and the abuse because that is their place.
Whether John makes $50,000 and Jane makes $45,000 is not nearly as important. Whether a woman can become a Pro-baseball player, or earn money in the woman's basketball league, or become President, or CEO of Microsoft is not as important.
Where the basic humanity of woman is in question, Where the idea that women are less than men, Where women work not for money but out of fear, There is a place for Feminism.
That place is here, in America, not only in the boardrooms but in the fields and the tenemant houses, the brothels and the inner city sweat shops, its in the drug dens and the small businesses and the maid's chamber. Its anywhere a man says, "She's just a woman."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:What about teaching at the college level? It has always been male-dominated, yet it remains low-paying.
Wait, what? Faculty members here are treated like GODS, and are by far the wealthiest group of people in town.
Edit: According to monster.com, median salary for professors in my town is $97k. Median salary for a high school teacher is $45k, while median salary for an elementary teacher is $43k.
quote:I know the first thing you're going to say is "See, it's not that bad," but my problem is that it exists at all.
That just shows how a single factor - academic degree - influences the data. That alone reduces the difference to something "not that bad".
But consider other factors: Consider the research I alluded to earlier that women are less likely to negotiate aggressively for wages. That probably accounts for part of that difference. Consider differences in how men and women may be inclined to use their major - something I suspect may account for the difference in liberal arts wages in particular, as those majors can do a wide variety of things. Consider the chances of women being pregnant or having children or getting married and deciding on the more traditional role of housewife (a roll women take more than men.)
That whittles the difference down further. Now, even then there may be some difference, because in some companies there is still discrimination. But the truth is, I don't think it's really that big of a deal, or one we can fix with anything other than time. It's not a fence. It's a few chunks of wood sticking out of the ground from a time when there was fences, and that will soon enough be trampled over by the masses heading in a different direction.
Today normal people don't agree with such companies. But feminism is going further - too far, in my view.
posted
Nick, I don’t think you can separate legal and societal issues quite so neatly. Laws are expressions of society’s values, and the fact that we, as a society, won’t say that women are equal to men is a problem, whether or not I can point to a specific instance that the law would have changed.
I was at some of the debates the last time Iowa tried to pass an equal rights amendment to the state constitution. There were people who were arguing that it was unnecessary, that we didn’t need it, because men and women are already equal under the law, and that when the constitution says “men” it really means “men and women.” But there were just as many that were arguing that we shouldn’t have it because men and women should not be equal under the law. I argue that the presence of the latter should have proved to the former that they were wrong, or at least that “‘men’ means both genders” is not universally agreed on. And since that is the case, what is wrong with clarifying by adding the phrase “and women”? Why were some people so vehemently against it?
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd support an equal rights amendment if it made it clear that it would have no impact on the constitutionality of abortion. Given that the equal protection argument is starting to overtake the substantive due process argument for abortion rights, I'm not willing to take the risk.
Similarly, I won't donate money to or support in any way groups associated with abortion rights, no matter how peripherally. Which means NO mainstream feminisim group will ever have my support. Feminisim's entanglement with abortion rights is a serious problem for achieving equality in this country.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
