Equality for women- how far has it come really?

[wwidgirl]

So what do you think?

How far has women's lib really come?

I think this issue is akin to racism in that, technically/legally, everyone is equal, however, systematic as well as institutional racism and sexism still exists. Discuss.

[whocares]

Discuss.

That would really depend on which country/culture you're considering...

[wwidgirl]

That would really depend on which country/culture you're considering...

Sorry, I should clarify- In the western world.

[zimv20]

since when could women start threads?!?!

just kidding :-)

[wwidgirl]

since when could women start threads?!?!

just kidding :-)

I'm really a man. I put the "girl" at the end of my username so people will take me less seriously.

[macka]

I'm really a man. I put the "girl" at the end of my username so people will take me less seriously.

Oh. :eek:
Well um, that's sure to throw everybody off..

Since universal suffrage for women at the turn of the 20th century......can't really say much on their behalf. :cool:

[frankzeg]

Based on my highly biased position as a male I would say that in certain industries the barriers are substantially gone. I work at a large corporation and anyone who would propose to throw up some sort of glass ceiling would be treading on extremely thin ice. This is not to say that top positions are filled in a wholly unbiased way. However at some point the bias against women fades to the same level as is held against someone who is not from the same technical or workgroup background as the top dog.

At the working level where I reside I can see no evidence of substantial bias. There is a bias against anyone who is the meek, mild, workaday type who does the job but shows little motivation to do more. Even worse is a lack of competence and an unwillingness to learn. I think those personality types are more or less evenly divided between sexes.

However in less supervised industries I can imagine it is the same as 1950. Especially where one man has total decision making power and is untroubled by a Human Resources department. However if the practices are obvious that manager is begging to be sued. Even if he wins the costs are not inconsequential. Perhaps worse the demands on his limited time to support such a suit can be enormous. Given today's business climate where inefficiency is punished severely I cannot imagine a well-managed company not taking advantage of a talented woman and instead promoting a no-good brother-in-law. Who can afford such a luxury? But I suppose there are plenty of examples.

I often wonder if the lack of women in high profile postitions in industry is because of the personal decisions that must be made to get to that level. In my business it means that you don't get to see your family much and are on the road MOST of the time. You work extended hours forever and although you are well compensated the $/hr are not extraordinarily high until the very highest levels are reached. Certainly they are not enough to justify losing most of your free time to a corporate entity. So you are sacrificing a scarce resource- your time on the planet- for a CHANCE at the big time. In addition as you rise you are increasingly disconnected from the real work of designing and making a product. It is likely that you got into the business because you LIKED doing that sort of work- it was a personal strength. It may not be to your liking to be forced to dispense with that activity. Anyway I wonder if women in general would be less inclined to make this sort of personal deal. They may be more inclined to start their own businesses so that the deal is more on their terms. Just some thoughts....
z

[numediaman]

How far has it come?

Here is the picture from the bill signing ceremony for the so-called Partial Birth Abortion Law. Notice anyone missing? Anyone is a skirt? anyone not white?:

[Neserk]

White males are still given preference regardless of their abilities in the work place. Notice on the Apprenctice when it was the males vs. the females that had to unmix them when they were down to 4 (?) males. In the end you had 4 males and 1 female. Then 3 males and 1 female, 2 males 1 female, 2 males. The ratio does not make sense when you think about it. If the women were doing so well as a team why are they suddenly disappearing every episode?

When people see a white male they automatically assume he is competant and he is hired, promoted, etc. etc. He may be, he may not be. But reality isn't really the issue.

When I was an undergraduate and studying psychology I remember studies that showed that attractive, tall people were automatically assumed to be more intelligent and capable than shorter people or less attractive people. I can almost guarantee you that the same thing goes for white males.

So, legal rights such as property ownership and being allowed to have a profession of choice, we've come a long way. But discrimination is still a huge issue, especially in the work place. So is devaluing what we do.

OTOH, men get screwed in the home. Especially when it comes to divorce and child custody. They still have a shorter life span which may be in part do to unfair expectations of them increasing their stress levels.

[zimv20]

I'm really a man. I put the "girl" at the end of my username so people will take me less seriously.
ha! touche

though i'd agree women have made great strides in the workplace, iirc there's still an overwhelmingly male-dominance in the CEO and board roles.

[Neserk]

Someone just accused me of having PMS and saying I was unsuccessful in life and that is why I have the opinion I do!

So, yes, it is alive and well!

[jefhatfield]

when i was a kid, i never heard the term congresswoman

there were no hillarys, elizabeths, or condis who may be put in the same sentence as presidential candidate or vp hopeful

don't get me wrong, there still is a long way to go

[jefhatfield]

White males are still given preference regardless of their abilities in the work place. Notice on the Apprenctice when it was the males vs. the females that had to unmix them when they were down to 4 (?) males. In the end you had 4 males and 1 female. Then 3 males and 1 female, 2 males 1 female, 2 males. The ratio does not make sense when you think about it. If the women were doing so well as a team why are they suddenly disappearing every episode?

When people see a white male they automatically assume he is competant and he is hired, promoted, etc. etc. He may be, he may not be. But reality isn't really the issue.

When I was an undergraduate and studying psychology I remember studies that showed that attractive, tall people were automatically assumed to be more intelligent and capable than shorter people or less attractive people. I can almost guarantee you that the same thing goes for white males.

So, legal rights such as property ownership and being allowed to have a profession of choice, we've come a long way. But discrimination is still a huge issue, especially in the work place. So is devaluing what we do.

OTOH, men get screwed in the home. Especially when it comes to divorce and child custody. They still have a shorter life span which may be in part do to unfair expectations of them increasing their stress levels.

in the past, the white male was the most common group in the workplace so it may not always have been an automatic preference or an attempt to leave others out

but today, white women are the biggest single group, or women in general *as taken as a larger group, which outnumber men in the working world, are the most common group in the workplace/market so when nearly 99 percent of the ceo's of fortune 500s and majority of board chairman roles are white males then it can be said that there is absolutely a preference going on...one has to ask, "then where are the women?"

[Neserk]

but today, white women are the biggest single group, or women in general *as taken as a larger group, which outnumber men in the working world, are the most common group in the workplace/market so when nearly 99 percent of the ceo's of fortune 500s and majority of board chairman roles are white males then it can be said that there is absolutely a preference going on...one has to ask, "then where are the women?"

Thank you! Finally, someone else who sees it!

[Krizoitz]

White males are still given preference regardless of their abilities in the work place. Notice on the Apprenctice when it was the males vs. the females that had to unmix them when they were down to 4 (?) males. In the end you had 4 males and 1 female. Then 3 males and 1 female, 2 males 1 female, 2 males. The ratio does not make sense when you think about it. If the women were doing so well as a team why are they suddenly disappearing every episode?
Because they didn't continue to perform as well? Because the tasks were different and it didn't suit them as well. The only way you would say there wasn't a bias is if the women won. You're bias is just as bad, you assume that if a white male does well he must be being favored. Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe they are just doing well. And before you go and say well Bill wasn't as good, you still have given no evidence to back that statement up. A few clips from a heavily edited TV show are hardly substantial evidence.


When people see a white male they automatically assume he is competant and he is hired, promoted, etc. etc. He may be, he may not be. But reality isn't really the issue.

You make this broad sweeping generalization about all situations and you expect to be taken seriously. Some people may assume a white male is more qualified simply because of his race/sex. Some do not. Maybe you live and work in an area where this is a particular problem, but you can't assume that it is prevalent everywhere based on that information alone.


When I was an undergraduate and studying psychology I remember studies that showed that attractive, tall people were automatically assumed to be more intelligent and capable than shorter people or less attractive people. I can almost guarantee you that the same thing goes for white males.

Without any evidence whatsoever you claim that whitemales are given privilege. If you expect people to be swayed to your side of an argument you can't just make sweeping over generalized statements like that and have no evidence to back it up.

BOTTOM LINE
Discrimination in society is still a very big issue. Where its based on race, sex, age, or religion it exists. I'm not going to be idealistic and say we live in a utopia of equality, i'd have to be out of my mind. BUT and this is a big but, the whole world isn't racist, sexist, etc. Many many people live their lives without resorting to discriminatory practices.

You can continue to hold your belief that the whole world is out to get you and that we are all racist. You can contine to claim that I have been favored because I am a white male (I would love to see evidence of this, really I would). Likely nothing anyone says or does here will change your view because you don't want to see outside your box.

I admit that bigotry exists, no one is denying that. But to claim that everyone is out to get you if your a woman or minority, well you are managing to alienate alot of people who aren't.

[Neserk]

. But to claim that everyone is out to get you if your a woman or minority, .

The above statement is a load of crap.

Go elsewhere. I've no desire to interact with you and will no longer do so. You are the first person to ever be put on my ignore list.

[Krizoitz]

The above statement is a load of crap.

Go elsewhere. I've no desire to interact with you and will no longer do so. You are the first person to ever be put on my ignore list.

Just out of curiousity, does anyone else see what I said as being that bad?

[jefhatfield]

Just out of curiousity, does anyone else see what I said as being that bad?

i don't see what you said as bad, but merely ignorant or from the view of someone who has had a very sheltered or limited life...this is not a bad thing in itself because we are all products of our life, how long we have been here, or how long we have been in the work force

your statements do sound more ignorant than almost anything i have seen in these political forums on macrumors and i have been here nearly four years and i started the political talk here and it is those statements which can be taken as offensive, but it also seems obvious that you are not out to offend neserk on these forums in any way...i think you just have a different point of view and not an opposing view

i live in an extremely wealthy area (pebble beach, monterey peninsula, silicon valley region, ca) and it is the "nose picker" capital of the world..there are a lot of really rich people of all colors and creeds who live such a sheltered existence that being aware is not high on the list...it's kind of like beverly hills, 90210 and people mature and grow up more slowly here...and a big issue can be how big the boobs of the girl you date are or which designer shirt looks best with your skin tone ;)

[Krizoitz]

i don't see what you said as bad, but merely ignorant or from the view of someone who has had a very sheltered or limited life...this is not a bad thing in itself because we are all products of our life, how long we have been here, or how long we have been in the work force

your statements do sound more ignorant than almost anything i have seen in these political forums on macrumors and i have been here nearly four years and i started the political talk here and it is those statements which can be taken as offensive, but it also seems obvious that you are not out to offend neserk on these forums in any way...i think you just have a different point of view and not an opposing view

i live in an extremely wealthy area (pebble beach, monterey peninsula, silicon valley region, ca) and it is the "nose picker" capital of the world..there are a lot of really rich people of all colors and creeds who live such a sheltered existence that being aware is not high on the list...it's kind of like beverly hills, 90210 and people mature and grow up more slowly here...and a big issue can be how big the boobs of the girl you date are or which designer shirt looks best with your skin tone ;)

I certainly haven't lived a sheltered life, and I have seen racism and I do think its a problem, I just don't think that everyone is racist like Neserk seems to claim.

[pseudobrit]

I certainly haven't lived a sheltered life, and I have seen racism and I do think its a problem, I just don't think that everyone is racist like Neserk seems to claim.

The problem is that sexism is ingrained in our culture so deeply and insidiously you can't really see it unless you're almost on the outside looking in.

[jefhatfield]

I certainly haven't lived a sheltered life, and I have seen racism and I do think its a problem, I just don't think that everyone is racist like Neserk seems to claim.

even though i am a iminority, i did grow up where i live and thus, like most people in my town, have lived a sheltered life...at least growing up through high school and/or college

like i said we are all just forming views from what we have or have not seen

my best advice is to look at your statements ten, fifteen, or twenty years from now

if then you still think what you said is true from many more experiences in your life, then all i have to say is that you and neserk simply agree to disagree...neither one of you are completely right or completely wrong...it really just comes down to perspective

though i know i spent my first half of my life, 18 years, living at home and just living in one small affluent town, what you said in your statements are pretty much what i might have said at your age...i hated what old people 30, 40, 50, or older would always tell me and i thought they were staid or boring, but basically life will kick you in your teeth, hard, over the next few years/decades and you may change some viewpoints...but the best way to approach it can be to learn from the positives...and negatives

i am just rambling on here and being middle aged, but really actually most likely more than half way through my life (middle age is a friendly way to say "i am 2/3 or 3/4 the way through"..or over the hill..., but i still feel like i am just starting to learn about life ;) ...young on the inside, but i have to do something bout that gray hair and flabby skin ;)

[Neserk]

i don't see what you said as bad, but merely ignorant or from the view of someone who has had a very sheltered or limited life...

<snipped a bit>

your statements do sound more ignorant than almost anything i have seen in these political forums on macrumors and i have been here nearly four years and i started the political talk here and it is those statements which can be taken as offensive,

<snipped a bit more>




It wasn't simply what he said here but what he said on another thread (which has been locked). Then he comes here to attack. He has a tendency to make claims of things I believe or say that I don't (for example what I highlighted when I stated he was now on my ignore list).

When he grows up I may talk to him again. In the meantime, I will leave it to the more mature males handle him here. I think you are the only people he will listen to. He certainly won't listen to a mere female.

And thank you, btw. I appreciate your point of view.

[Neserk]

The problem is that sexism is ingrained in our culture so deeply and insidiously you can't really see it unless you're almost on the outside looking in.

no, you can't always see it. I did some research on women's studies and job discrimination earlier today. It was interesting to hear people talking. It is so part of our culture that people have to actually be educated in order to see it.

Anyone who doubts, take a woman's studies class. I never had the opportunity, personally, but I've gotten bits and pieces in different courses from my professors who ranged from old white males (who were feminists) to middle aged lesbians females (also feminists).

I even had some insight on my trip to Israel 9 years ago from a middle aged white male. Sometimes middle aged and older men have an easier time spotting discrimination than do woman and minorities. I think it is because they realize how people are *supposed* to be treated and see women and minorities not being treated that way. They also have often lived more life and seen more things with open eyes. Being older one also tends to not give a damn about what others think and they state the facts instead of trying to play the games.

[jefhatfield]

i remember taking a women's studies class in college 20 years ago and we had to read the women's studies classic "rubyfruit jungle"...there were only two males in the class and i have to admit, it was too progressive and out there for either one of us to comprehend

i simply sat in class too afraid to ask questions and the other boy was always saying what he felt but his views were typical of his age and he reflected a lot of what society still thought was the norm...his comments didn't go over too well in the context of the class ;)

i thought the book was a statement of far left politics and on the surface that's what it may have looked like in the eyes of a boy...the class was populated by a lot of conservative christian girls and not once did i hear a comment coming from any of them that disagreed with anything political in the book...actually, they quite liked it very much as it addressed gender issues in a roundabout way...i never saw the connection then

many years later, i read the book again and i was floored by its depth and then i understood...i wish i had paid more attention in college during that class but even if i had stayed in school and got a phd in women's studies, there is no way i could have grasped the major concepts of that book or many others

for many of us, i think it takes many years of life and experience to be able to comprehend a book like that in its context and even though i think it is one of the most brilliant books of its time, it is far too sopisticated for the average college student since, imho, college is just a mere continuation of high school

the best teacher in life is experience and many years of it

[jefhatfield]

but that being said, i think there are many great books that are instantly understandable to even the youngest readers

shakespeare may be hard to understand at first but the beauty of his work is that once you get past the language, the universal concepts are easy to grasp for just about any reader

steinbeck is an author of profound depth which i feel is a good writer for people of all ages to comprehend

and of course, the bible is a great read and mostly very easy to understand for readers of all ages...some of the cultural concepts and norms of the time are hard to fathom, but like shakespeare, after the initial culture shock, the concepts jump off the page and grasp the reader

women's studies classes are very popular with students of all ages at the college here since more than any other class i can think of, it's wonderful to revist the concepts and ideas years after one attended college because many people, males especially, can be more present and empathetic to women writers on the issues of sexuality and gender

one great book i recommend for all men is "men are from mars, women are from venus"...now that is an eye opener and goes a long way in explaining why men and women often have a hard time communicating

[jefhatfield]

and finally, one last thought

the main reason i think, from "men are from mars, women are from venus" was so great was that it showed that in some ways, besides the physical, men and women are different

many make the mistake in thinking that since women want equal rights, they want to be the same as men...most women i have met don't want to grow beards and be victims of prostate cancer and impotence ;)

i think women want the same rights, but still be women and have the attributes which make a woman unique...i think a woman should be able to do anything a man could do in the military, but that doesn't mean that i think the women will be entering the same duties in the same ratios as men due to different interests and abilities

while there are some women who have passed ranger selection and made it into the rigorous delta force in the us army, they are very under represented in that unit

but in linguistics, women are in far greater proportion to men

i think this is due more to orientation and ability more than it is due to sexism...a woman is more likely to be a combat pilot than an infantry foot soldier with a 110 pound pack on their back in the desert and i think the physical size of women accounts for that...it wasn't until the gulf war that i saw clips of women in combat with packs like that and m-16s

one female combat pilot basically summed it up by saying that, for her size (combat pilots are usually rather small individuals regardless of gender), she was more equipped to pull the trigger of the guns on her jet with 3 lbs of force in her finger than she was in carrying a 100 pound pack in the desert...i think for many women this holds true

but there will always be a delta force, or british sas operator that is a woman but i don't think that will ever be the norm for a woman in today's armed services

over the years, people have become taller and more massive and it is possible that one day all jobs in the military will be perfectly representative of the ratio of men and women who are enlisted/commissioned in their ranks

i think times have changed, but slowly, but for the first time i notice many women police officers, highway patrol, and firefighters in my city...when i was a kid, there were no women in those jobs

i think the biggest jump in progress, in america, will be when a woman becomes president

the best possibilities so far have been geraldine ferraro (vp candidate in 84) and elizabeth dole (presidential candidate in 2000)...i have hopes for either senator clinton, condi rice, or dole

i don't really care which political party gets there first with a woman president...i think the concept will promote a lot of progress and healing

[blue&whiteman]

I feel equality is more a state of mind among the people a woman spends her life around. any laws or new guidelines will never be on par with people actually viewing you as an equal.

there will always be ignorance as well as understanding and respect among any group of people. the ignorant ones should simply be ignored because confronting them will only make them rage in ignorance even more.

women are equal and always have been. its just that not all people see it that way.

[Krizoitz]

Personal attacks on myself aside, I wanted to address the point of this post again.

Does discrimination exist? Yes.
Is it more prevelant in certain areas? Yes.
Should we just be happy that things are better now? No.

Some people on this thread have obviously had bad experiences and I don't claim for a minute that they are wrong in those experience. Those experiences however aren't the only ones out there. In many ways our society HAS gotten better. I can speak from personal experience both in my years in education and the work place that equality can and does exist. Everywhere? No. But the idea that simply being a white male makes your life easy and that everyone favors you is simply not true. Do somepeople favor white males? Most assuredly, and I'm not talking about white extremeists I'm talking about people in places like buisness. It exists and its unfortunate. But its not universal. Some people favor women. Others minorities. Its not as wide spread but it does happen. And some of us don't favor any. Having had the opportunity to work with a variety of people over the years I have no doubt that a woman can excell in any field she wishes. Whether it be as a mother or a molecular biologist. The same is true for minorities.

Maybe in looking to see if the world has gotten better or not you should look to people like myself who truly are color-blind when it comes to this. We do exist, we are proud to exist and we will continue to treat people based on the content of their character as Dr. King so eloquently put it.

[takao]

one female combat pilot basically summed it up by saying that, for her size (combat pilots are usually rather small individuals regardless of gender), she was more equipped to pull the trigger of the guns on her jet with 3 lbs of force in her finger than she was in carrying a 100 pound pack in the desert...i think for many women this holds true

but there will always be a delta force, or british sas operator that is a woman but i don't think that will ever be the norm for a woman in today's armed services


i have to agree on your post i just want to make an addition:

women weren't allowed in the austrian forces untill 1996... through the years uncountable masses of activists complained about that and when finally was made possible with big media attention guess how many women tried to join the forces ? 100... and how many failed during the (lower compared the the male) tests for officers ? 94 ?
now perhaps 1% of all officers are woman
(we have still consript service for all men here..woman join voluntary)
2001 during our consript service we we part of an exercise where we were under the command by corporal first class soldiers who are making their sergeant (don't know the classes in english sorry) and we were commanded by different corporals thorugh the days
from the 110 corporals (8 women) 87 failed their tests (including all women)
the reason why all the women and 40 men failed was: "not able to motivate
squad under bad circumstances" "not treating privates correctly" the rest failed because of "tactical failures" ;)

BTW (offtopic): boy got the leutnant angry when i promoted to private first class :rolleyes: back in the bureau , my chef (staff sergeant) said (grining) "the face of the leutnant was worth it to suggest you for a promotion" .. ohh the endless pain of those repeating "Private first class bring those 2 privates to seargent xy across the street, because they do not know the way" orders

[jefhatfield]

But the idea that simply being a white male makes your life easy and that everyone favors you is simply not true.

i think overall one can say being a white male, or even just a male of any race, will make it EASIER, but not simply easy...almost nothing is easy in that sense

men still make more than women for the same job done

take 1000 businesses at random in the united states...i bet your chances with a resume in your hand, assuming all qualifications are equal, would be easier to land a job if you are a white male vs a black female

i venture to say that if you applied to a job run by a black male, in most instances you would stand a better chance as a white male, or male of any race, than a female of any race

take the same scenarios with a business owned by a hispanic or asian male...if you are a male applying for a sample set of 1000 businesses in that category, being male has the advantage

i hate to say it, but there is still too much sexism among males of every race and ethnic group...it's a worldwide problem that exists in every major culture

the world is most accurately broken up into two groups when it comes to workforce...men and women...it's an us vs. them dynamic

one day it is my hope that things won't be seen so much as male vs female in the workplace

besides culture and nationality, the idea of the male being the "hunter" and bread winner is a tradition that goes back hundreds of thousands of years, and it is ingrained in the male species not to give that up to a woman or even share it

let's say, through different cultural trends (remember more women are in med school than men, for instance...and women being less hireable at age 17/18 tend to go to college when they are shut out of jobs where men get hired more easily right out of high school), that women end up being far more educated than men in the next generation...do you think that men will still hold the key jobs in society? and how long would it take for equality?

[idkew]

besides culture and nationality, the idea of the male being the "hunter" and bread winner is a tradition that goes back hundreds of thousands of years, and it is ingrained in the male species not to give that up to a woman or even share it


i would absolutely LOVE to be a stay at home dad. my girl is completely against it. she wants to stay at home, not be forced to wake up at 5-6am, drive an hour to work, and get home at 6 or 7 pm after fighting rush hour once again. she doesn't want to rarely see the kids, the spouse. deal with crap all day long... so, in my view, a stay at home mom is a MUCH BETTER JOB than a dad who goes to work. anyway- who cares about work? family is much more important, and the traditional culture dictates that the man be absent for the overwhelmingly large majority of their family's life.

also- say my girl (and i) get pregnant. who gets time off to see the kid? is paternity leave accepted, or will i be looked down upon? what happens if she doesn't want the kid and i do? the women wins in all these cases.

not to mention- from what i have seen, the graphic design (my profession) world is dominated by women. following your, and most other's arguments here, i, The White Male, is the one who is being unfairly treated. after-all, you say that the dominate sex/race will most always only hire their kind.

did anyone ever stop and think that maybe women are not the dominate sex in business because they would RATHER stay at home and raise their family? ever stop and think that men dominate the higher ranks because it takes some time for the equality to move up from no experience, entry level positions, to a position that requires 30 years of experience? anyone ever stop and think that less women are in management because they want to work for a few years, then "retire" and raise a family, thus not allowing them time to reach management? anyone ever stop and think that it is difficult for a woman to bear a family, and have a fast moving career? anyone ever stop and think about the opposite positions? i am not saying each of those situations is a fact, but they are a possibility. raw numbers do not explain the entire situation.

basically, what i am trying to get at, is that it is not all black and white. not all males ignore female workers. not all whites hate blacks. it isn't only the woman who can raise a child. men aren't the only people sexually harassing. yes, each situation is once again possible, but they are not the rule.

[wwidgirl]

did anyone ever stop and think that maybe women are not the dominate sex in business because they would RATHER stay at home and raise their family? ever stop and think that men dominate the higher ranks because it takes some time for the equality to move up from no experience, entry level positions, to a position that requires 30 years of experience? anyone ever stop and think that less women are in management because they want to work for a few years, then "retire" and raise a family, thus not allowing them time to reach management? anyone ever stop and think that it is difficult for a woman to bear a family, and have a fast moving career? anyone ever stop and think about the opposite positions? i am not saying each of those situations is a fact, but they are a possibility. raw numbers do not explain the entire situation.

Did you ever stop and think that maybe women are not hired to the higher ranks because men assume they will stop working one day in order to have a family?

And while we're using personal experience as evidence- _I_ do not intend to be a stay-at-home mom. I probably won't even have kids. I think being a stay at home mom is a pretty rough job as it is 24/7 compared to most regular jobs where the work stops at 5 (or 7 in your case). I kind of feel sorry for your "girl" as you seem to have very little respect for her.

I think the recent decades has shown that it IS possible for women to have both a good career and a family. I would even go so far as to say that most women choose to work when they have a family (for financial, as well as other reasons).

[blue&whiteman]

I feel equality is more a state of mind among the people a woman spends her life around. any laws or new guidelines will never be on par with people actually viewing you as an equal.

there will always be ignorance as well as understanding and respect among any group of people. the ignorant ones should simply be ignored because confronting them will only make them rage in ignorance even more.

women are equal and always have been. its just that not all people see it that way.

like I said earlier...

I give a perfectly logical response to this thread and it gets no comments yet the more ignorant comments get all the attention.. ignore ignorance!

[idkew]

I kind of feel sorry for your "girl" as you seem to have very little respect for her.

are you kidding me? where does it say i have little respect. where did i say i think she is worthless?

in fact, i am quite proud of her. she is doing great at her job, promotions are coming much quicker than average..... just because i want to stay at home, does not mean i don't respect her.

as for your quotes around girl. what would you like me to call her? my girl friend? the overly PC significant other? how about my breadwinner? she calls me her guy, i have no problem with it, i am her guy.

i must be a (killing, raping, pillaging, bigoted, sexest) white male in your eyes.

Did you ever stop and think that maybe women are not hired to the higher ranks because men assume they will stop working one day in order to have a family?

Yes, but that doesn't support my argument, so I didn't add it in. But while we are talking about it. What percentage of women do stop working? Is this bias based on dreams, or is it somewhat based in reality?


And while we're using personal experience as evidence- _I_ do not intend to be a stay-at-home mom. I probably won't even have kids. I think being a stay at home mom is a pretty rough job as it is 24/7 compared to most regular jobs where the work stops at 5 (or 7 in your case).

See, there you go again. So when the man comes home, he does nothing for the family? Is it your view that he plops down on the couch and gets a beer? It is views like this that make the situation worse.

Besides, which is more stressful? Cleaning the house, taking the kids to soccer, changing diapers and picking them up from band practice OR handling an irate customer who wanted something that didn't happen, being called into work at 8:00, just when you sat down to read your kid a story, and missing that baseball game of your kid's that you promised to be at because something happened at work?

I know i would rather be at home and changing the diapers.


I think the recent decades has shown that it IS possible for women to have both a good career and a family. I would even go so far as to say that most women choose to work when they have a family (for financial, as well as other reasons).

Yes, it is possible for both parents to work. Also, go look at some statistics about children who are raised by strangers in daycare, kids who come home from school to no adult supervision. You will clearly see that a child who has a full time parent is much better off in life than a kid who doesn't. A full time parent is a necessary part of a family. Man or Woman.

[wwidgirl]

Ignore ignorance? But that won't make it go away.
If someone says something ignorant, isn't it better to try to teach them, show them how they're wrong, etc,.?

like I said earlier...

I give a perfectly logical response to this thread and it gets no comments yet the more ignorant comments get all the attention.. ignore ignorance!

[blue&whiteman]

Ignore ignorance? But that won't make it go away.
If someone says something ignorant, isn't it better to try to teach them, show them how they're wrong, etc,.?

ignorant people don't want to learn. this is why they are ignorant in the first place...

[wwidgirl]

Not always. SOmetimes it really is just a lack of knowledge. I mean, how will the world ever change if no one bothers to try to alleviate ignorance?

ignorant people don't want to learn. this is why they are ignorant in the first place...

[Rower_CPU]

ignorant people don't want to learn. this is why they are ignorant in the first place...

Many times, ignorant people haven't been exposed to new knowledge or multiple sides of an issue - hence their ignorance. After they've been exposed to the breadth of a topic they can no longer claim ignorance.

It's not always about lack of initiative on their part.

[idkew]

ignorant people don't want to learn. this is why they are ignorant in the first place...


ig·no·rant *
adj.

Lacking education or knowledge.
Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
Unaware or uninformed.



Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, not an aversion to knowledge. Before this post, you were ignorant to the definition of ignorance. Now you are not. You did not purposefully avoid the correct definition.

[blue&whiteman]

I see what some of you are saying and your ideas of helping them understand may work if they are quite young but anyone 20+ is pretty much set in who they are and how they think.

I feel that if someone has a bad social flaw (sexism, racism etc.) it is best to just stay away from them. conversing with them will almost never turn out positive.

save yourself the stress and concentrate your positive energy on those who deserve it and yourself.

[Frohickey]

So what do you think?


I'll answer your question with another question...

Why does the man have to sleep on the couch even though he is right? :eek: :D

[radhak]

It wasn't simply what he said here but what he said on another thread (which has been locked). Then he comes here to attack. He has a tendency to make claims of things I believe or say that I don't (for example what I highlighted when I stated he was now on my ignore list).

When he grows up I may talk to him again. In the meantime, I will leave it to the more mature males handle him here. I think you are the only people he will listen to. He certainly won't listen to a mere female.



In Krizoitz's defence, I did not see this post of his as inflammatory. Confrontationist, maybe, but not more. As I read it, he was insisting on statistical data to support your claim, rather than (like you said) When people see a white male they automatically assume he is competant and he is hired, promoted, etc. etc. This statement of yours surely seems an assumption on your part. How do you know what people are thinking, unless you have talked to the (say) 250 people on your floor at work and you have at least 126 people coming up with that response?

Not knowing about the earlier (locked) thread, I cannot comment on the history between you both, but definitely there is something to be said for the futility of sweeping statements, this way or that. Of course, even Krizoitz resorts to the same when he says, Many many people live their lives without resorting to discriminatory practices. How do you know, Krizoitz? You too did not offer any supporting data!

My personal opinion - if we were to give statistics instead of opinions everytime we open our mouth, we need not post here at all. Stats are good, but opinions are spice ;)

Anyway, one interesting observation : my wife told me the other day that she strongly prefers to go to Male gynecs! She believes female ones are not as competent :confused: I thought that was extremely discriminatory, and even a bit silly; doesn't the ability to understand the plumbing personally mean anything?

Me, I would not ever go to a lady doctor : i prefer coughing when an impersonal guy is clutching me :D

[jefhatfield]

In Krizoitz's defence, I did not see this post of his as inflammatory. Confrontationist, maybe, but not more. As I read it, he was insisting on statistical data to support your claim, rather than (like you said) This statement of yours surely seems an assumption on your part. How do you know what people are thinking, unless you have talked to the (say) 250 people on your floor at work and you have at least 126 people coming up with that response?

Not knowing about the earlier (locked) thread, I cannot comment on the history between you both, but definitely there is something to be said for the futility of sweeping statements, this way or that. Of course, even Krizoitz resorts to the same when he says, How do you know, Krizoitz? You too did not offer any supporting data!

My personal opinion - if we were to give statistics instead of opinions everytime we open our mouth, we need not post here at all. Stats are good, but opinions are spice ;)

Anyway, one interesting observation : my wife told me the other day that she strongly prefers to go to Male gynecs! She believes female ones are not as competent :confused: I thought that was extremely discriminatory, and even a bit silly; doesn't the ability to understand the plumbing personally mean anything?

Me, I would not ever go to a lady doctor : i prefer coughing when an impersonal guy is clutching me :D

out of curiosity, have you ever taken a stats class in high school or college?

there are lies, damn lies, and there are statistics ;)

[idkew]

My personal opinion - if we were to give statistics instead of opinions everytime we open our mouth, we need not post here at all. Stats are good, but opinions are spice

But statistics are not the end all, authoritative, 100% correct answer to all questions.

Just because more women are in the non-managerial positions, does not, 100%, without-a-doubt, qualitatively mean that sexism is rampant in business.

I am sure there are many reasons that there is a lack of managerial level women, giving the reason as "sexist men" is not only shortsighted, it can be easily debunked with a STUDY.


hummm- a study i say.... how about this one: woman, children and working (http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:MIZ997BxGAQJ:sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cb/CASEbrief2.pdf&hl=en&ie=UTF-8).

i have not read the entire thing, but it sure proves that women do miss/ not work due to children (not that this is not obvious). BUT, as a HR manager, you have two identical candidates for your job opening. One is a young man, the other is a young woman. Who do you choose? By looking at the linked study, it seems it may be prudent to hire the male, because ~50% of women will be missing/quitting work due to children. (no data provided for men missing/quitting work)

missing/quitting work means less productivity. less productivity means less profit. less profit means you (the HR manager) look bad. looking bad means a lower raise, less promotion potential... new hires require training and other negative costs. i think you see my point.

now- i am not saying people should not hire women, i am just trying to work through the though process of a HR person.

[radhak]

out of curiosity, have you ever taken a stats class in high school or college?

there are lies, damn lies, and there are statistics ;)

i did masters in math, so answer to your question, yes. but i never said in my post that i supported stats 100%; just that stats are the only way many people believe in things.

and while you did mention that quote about stats, i am not sure anybody really knows what the problems with statistics is. lemme give an example : just after Clinton was impeached (and won it), somebody from his camp sponsored a survey to find if people were really disgusted with him. so they had just this question to ask, "knowing what you now know about Bill Clinton, has your opinion about him changed since the last election?", except that they asked this question to people picked from a list of hard-core Republicans. Obviously, the one word answer to it from this sub-group was a resounding 'No', because they had never liked him and there was no reason to now! But that survey was shown as proof that the general public was totally (100 %) unaffected by Clinton's shenanigans. Talk of damn lies ;-)

[ that story could be apocryphal, but pretty neat still ]

but the quote i like even better is, "Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." (Aaron Levenstein)

:D

[Giaguara]

and finally, one last thought

the main reason i think, from "men are from mars, women are from venus" was so great was that it showed that in some ways, besides the physical, men and women are different [..]

I read that book too. I find it very helpful to understand how the people of my sex think. Because I just don't undestand them.

When I read that book, I felt really frustrated. Especially as it was so telling how men think and how women think .. and I could understand just how the men think so much better. I get frustrated with people behaving on the way the women behave / the womanly behaviour and way of thinking as described in the book. I _really_ do.

Equality? When women and men get paid the same amount of money for the same job. So far I have seen it in very rare places. ..

[jefhatfield]

i did masters in math, so answer to your question, yes. but i never said in my post that i supported stats 100%; just that stats are the only way many people believe in things.

and while you did mention that quote about stats, i am not sure anybody really knows what the problems with statistics is. lemme give an example : just after Clinton was impeached (and won it), somebody from his camp sponsored a survey to find if people were really disgusted with him. so they had just this question to ask, "knowing what you now know about Bill Clinton, has your opinion about him changed since the last election?", except that they asked this question to people picked from a list of hard-core Republicans. Obviously, the one word answer to it from this sub-group was a resounding 'No', because they had never liked him and there was no reason to now! But that survey was shown as proof that the general public was totally (100 %) unaffected by Clinton's shenanigans. Talk of damn lies ;-)

[ that story could be apocryphal, but pretty neat still ]

but the quote i like even better is, "Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." (Aaron Levenstein)

:D

i like that quote

my math (stats) class was also in grad school...he he...but in a totally different context...in b-school

so basically, dare i say it, it was more how to sell/market/advertise and how to "lie" with statistics so we were not what you would call mathematicians, but more like "merchants"

[jefhatfield]

but let's go back to male CEOs of fortune 500 companies

more than half the american workforce are women

the percentage of female CEOs is within two percent of three standard deviations from a normal distribution, or just around 2% CEOs

two of those companies i can think of right off the top of my head, unless things have changed, are avon and hewlett packard

that's better than nothing but women still have a long ways to go in terms of the apex of american management

i have to say there is still a lot of sexism going on...not as bad as 30 or 40 years ago, but it's still there today

[Krizoitz]

that's better than nothing but women still have a long ways to go in terms of the apex of american management

i have to say there is still a lot of sexism going on...not as bad as 30 or 40 years ago, but it's still there today

And thats the point of this thread, whether or not its better, not whether or not its perfect. You can admit it has improved and still feel that there is room to improve more. Certainly life had improved for African-Americans in the 60's (i.e. they were no longer slaves) but as we saw there was still much room for improvement.

[idkew]

i have to say there is still a lot of sexism going on...not as bad as 30 or 40 years ago, but it's still there today

which may be one reason for the lack of women in management. it may take a generation to get "old fashioned" beliefs out of management.

[jefhatfield]

which may be one reason for the lack of women in management. it may take a generation to get "old fashioned" beliefs out of management.

if a generation is defined as 20-25 years, i will take that...it would be great to get rid of most of sexism by then in american business

and i may still be alive to see it actually happen in my lifetime

as for other modern countries (western europe, japan, australia), i have no clue as to whether they are ahead, behind, or the same as the usa...but i would not characterize the usa as the best or most progressive country in gender issues and equality

my german friends have mentioned gender related issues years ago on things i hear are only getting movement in america right now

[Neserk]

Many times, ignorant people haven't been exposed to new knowledge or multiple sides of an issue - hence their ignorance. After they've been exposed to the breadth of a topic they can no longer claim ignorance.



That has been my own personal experience as well as why I want to teach!



It's not always about lack of initiative on their part.

It seems to depend on the person. For many it is *willful* ignorance. They are given the facts and choose not to believe them. Can't do much for those kinds of people. The truth won't matter until they are ready to see it.

[Neserk]

i remember taking a women's studies class in college 20 years ago and we had to read the women's studies classic "rubyfruit jungle"...there were only two males in the class and i have to admit, it was too progressive and out there for either one of us to comprehend

i simply sat in class too afraid to ask questions and the other boy was always saying what he felt but his views were typical of his age and he reflected a lot of what society still thought was the norm...his comments didn't go over too well in the context of the class ;)

i thought the book was a statement of far left politics and on the surface that's what it may have looked like in the eyes of a boy...the class was populated by a lot of conservative christian girls and not once did i hear a comment coming from any of them that disagreed with anything political in the book...actually, they quite liked it very much as it addressed gender issues in a roundabout way...i never saw the connection then

many years later, i read the book again and i was floored by its depth and then i understood...i wish i had paid more attention in college during that class but even if i had stayed in school and got a phd in women's studies, there is no way i could have grasped the major concepts of that book or many others

for many of us, i think it takes many years of life and experience to be able to comprehend a book like that in its context and even though i think it is one of the most brilliant books of its time, it is far too sopisticated for the average college student since, imho, college is just a mere continuation of high school

the best teacher in life is experience and many years of it

*Rubyfruit Jungle* (Just taking notes.) I have a few books similar to that I haven't tackled yet. One is "In Memory of Her" and the other "She Who Is" both are feminist theology. (I did my MA in Theology). I've read excerpts from them both but don't think I've read either one completely.

[Krizoitz]

if a generation is defined as 20-25 years, i will take that...it would be great to get rid of most of sexism by then in american business

and i may still be alive to see it actually happen in my lifetime

as for other modern countries (western europe, japan, australia), i have no clue as to whether they are ahead, behind, or the same as the usa...but i would not characterize the usa as the best or most progressive country in gender issues and equality

my german friends have mentioned gender related issues years ago on things i hear are only getting movement in america right now

Japan has a very male centered culture especially in the buisness world. On the other hand it is a very different culture with very different views. Women are given almost complete control over the household, and are in many ways looked up to more so than women over here. I don't know if they think its better or worse, or they are happier, having only done academic study, but it is different at the very least. I know that the idea of a feminist movement has never taken off very well over there , perhaps because of the much stronger view of tradition than we Americans seem to have, or perhaps because for the most part women don't want to have to work in the uber-stressfull work environment over there. Who knows.

[wwidgirl]

Just a few quick thoughts.

language is not neutral.
I dislike when women are referred to as "girl" (yes I realise this is ironic considering my username but this is a name I picked when I was much younger!) or "sweetheart" or "honey". Similarly, have you noticed that in the news especially in newspapers, women are more often referred to by their first names than their male counterparts are. Males get referred to as Mr. so and so. This difference makes women appear more like girls and demonstrates that those commenting on them are in positions of authority or superiority.

Women's bodies are never neutral. How a women looks always "says" something about her. How she chooses to wear her hair, whether she wears make up or not, etc. Men however CAN look neutral.

I don't necessarily believe that women are oppressed in an obvious sense (ie. not getting hired because of their sex). I think sexism is much more subtle than that. It's in the way that women feel pressure to look thin and attractive; the way women are represented in the media (or NOT represented in the media); the way women's sports are not supported; etc. I believe it's more of a societal/structural oppression.

[Krizoitz]

Women's bodies are never neutral. How a women looks always "says" something about her. How she chooses to wear her hair, whether she wears make up or not, etc. Men however CAN look neutral.


Interestingly enough a study was done awhile back (i'll try and find it) that looked ideal body weight for women. It showed the ideal healthy weight. Slightly to the skinny side, but still pretty close was what males viewed as the ideal. Dramatically to the skinny side was what women thought was the ideal weight.

[idkew]

"girl"

you still have yet to respond to my post, i believe it was #34.

I dislike when women are referred to as "girl" (yes I realise this is ironic considering my username but this is a name I picked when I was much younger!) or "sweetheart" or "honey". Similarly, have you noticed that in the news especially in newspapers, women are more often referred to by their first names than their male counterparts are. Males get referred to as Mr. so and so. This difference makes women appear more like girls and demonstrates that those commenting on them are in positions of authority or superiority.


and as for you being against pet names. i don't see them as a bad thing. i don't understand how a pet name could be demeaning. it is not like men call their loved one bitch, hoe and such (and expect a response, and her around anymore). not to mention, women use pet names just as much, if not more. i don't know how many times i have been called honey by a woman with which i am not involved. besides, i think life would get old very quick if husbands were to call their wives Mrs. XXXX all the time. Pets names are what to people in love use to converse with each other. Maybe this is why you are so against them. Jaded?

Women's bodies are never neutral. How a women looks always "says" something about her. How she chooses to wear her hair, whether she wears make up or not, etc. Men however CAN look neutral.


once again, you are blind to all but your side of the argument. looks say a lot about a man also. ever hear of muscle head? just because a man chooses to be fit and strong does not make them dumb. same goes for jock. what about men with grey hair? some see that as a mark of wisdom, but it is merely the lack of coloring in the hair, not an addition of knowledge to the mind. fat man are considered lazy and worthless by the masses. thin, tall men are considered successful (and promoted quicker). strong chins can help get you promoted. yes, men can look neutral, just as a woman can look neutral. are you using The Apprentice or other TV as your basis for arguments?


It's in the way that women feel pressure to look thin and attractive; the way women are represented in the media (or NOT represented in the media); the way women's sports are not supported; etc.


you think that men are not expected to look handsome? you think that if a man walked into a business meeting wearing a 3 day old beard, greasy face and hair, and holy jeans he has worn for a week, you think he would be taken seriously? a man is forced to dress the part, just as a woman is forced to dress a part. they are different, thank god, but each sex has an accepted look. i would like to be able to wear jeans and a t shirt to work, but that is not how the business world works.

also - it seems you are blaming society (a.k.a. - men, it seems in your view) that women are "forced" to look attractive. you should go out and listen to women talk. go watch some women tear apart the looks of another woman. it is less the man the "forces" this look upon women, than women themselves.

i don't think i have ever seen more than one newscast without a woman anchor. they are not the comic relief, they are not the stupid echo (as kelly is). they are just another spoke in the newscast wheel. same as the men.

...

basically, what i am trying to get at is that you are seeing one side of the story, and seem to be completely blind to the other side. i am sure you are thinking i am a sexist pig, but go back in my posts. please. find me a part where i say that there isn't sexism. i am providing you a missing view.

and i still want to know why you think that a 9-5 job exempts the man from any housework or child-rearing. that one shows blatant sexism on your part.

[jefhatfield]

thin and attractive works for certain job roles for women in our society

but then when a woman enters a postition that has some gravitas, then the body image rules change drastically

i have a female friend who is an mba in the bay area and very much into the yuppie mode...ambitious, smart, and very aware of business etiquette

she has noticed in many lower rung jobs, it helps if the woman is thin and attractive...like she is

but from middle management on, the successful women downplay their femininity almost to the point of choosing a male-like, almost stereotypical "dyke" persona

at least in the san francisco/san jose bay area in california, arguably the best place for women to succeed in the higher rungs of management, the thin and attractive woman does not get far

she has mentioned to me that first and foremost, you can't really be young *under 30, and get a key position in a company...no one will take you serously

and she has mentioned most middle management women she has met are not exactly thin either...they hold a little more weight on their bones...much like the fat cat male counterparts in business who are also mostly older

it's a catch 22 for women and she has noticed women who have finally been promoted to middle management and above have gone out of their way to look older, wiser, and a little bit heftier...and take on a much more masculine persona

...yet society worships the young, impish girl persona, but then again society still does not give the woman the go-ahead for higher positions in business outside of a token appointment here and there

[idkew]

same goes for basically every example you give when it comes to a man:

thin and attractive works for certain job roles for men in our society

but then when a man enters a postition that has some gravitas, then the body image rules change drastically

i have a male friend who is an mba in the bay area and very much into the yuppie mode...ambitious, smart, and very aware of business etiquette

he has noticed in many lower rung jobs, it helps if the man is thin and attractive...like he is

but from middle management on, the successful men downplay their masculinity almost to the point of choosing an old man-like [male-like], almost stereotypical "dyke" persona

at least in the san francisco/san jose bay area in california, arguably the best place for men to succeed in the higher rungs of management, the thin and attractive man does not get far

he has mentioned to me that first and foremost, you can't really be young *under 30, and get a key position in a company...no one will take you serously

and he has mentioned most middle management men she has met are not exactly thin either...they hold a little more weight on their bones...much like the fat cat male counterparts in business who are also mostly older

it's a catch 22 for men and he has noticed men who have finally been promoted to middle management and above have gone out of their way to look older, wiser, and a little bit heftier...and take on a much more masculine persona

...yet society worships the young, impish boy persona, but then again society still does not give the man the go-ahead for higher positions in business outside of a token appointment here and there.

[blue&whiteman]

jefhatfield:

I get the impression from how you write that you're not too fond of men at all. in most cases I can't blame you at all but not all men think the same. I am male and consider my self a humanitarian/feminist because of my strong stance on ALL people being treated equally regardless of sex, race or religion.

don't think bad of us all because there a some bad ones. many of us are filled with compassion and understanding.

[jefhatfield]

same goes for basically every example you give when it comes to a man:

thin and attractive works for certain job roles for men in our society

but then when a man enters a postition that has some gravitas, then the body image rules change drastically

i have a male friend who is an mba in the bay area and very much into the yuppie mode...ambitious, smart, and very aware of business etiquette

he has noticed in many lower rung jobs, it helps if the man is thin and attractive...like he is

but from middle management on, the successful men downplay their masculinity almost to the point of choosing an old man-like [male-like], almost stereotypical "dyke" persona

at least in the san francisco/san jose bay area in california, arguably the best place for men to succeed in the higher rungs of management, the thin and attractive man does not get far

he has mentioned to me that first and foremost, you can't really be young *under 30, and get a key position in a company...no one will take you serously

and he has mentioned most middle management men she has met are not exactly thin either...they hold a little more weight on their bones...much like the fat cat male counterparts in business who are also mostly older

it's a catch 22 for men and he has noticed men who have finally been promoted to middle management and above have gone out of their way to look older, wiser, and a little bit heftier...and take on a much more masculine persona

...yet society worships the young, impish boy persona, but then again society still does not give the man the go-ahead for higher positions in business outside of a token appointment here and there.

he he :)

actually to lesser degree, it works

but impish men don't go too far...unless they are george w bush

[jefhatfield]

jefhatfield:

I get the impression from how you write that you're not too fond of men at all. in most cases I can't blame you at all but not all men think the same. I am male and consider my self a humanitarian/feminist because of my strong stance on ALL people being treated equally regardless of sex, race or religion.

don't think bad of us all because there a some bad ones. many of us are filled with compassion and understanding.

i go with the most cases scenario you mention

but not all men are sexist and i know there are a lot of men who have compassion towards women

it will still take some time before things are equal

[mactastic]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?

[blue&whiteman]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?

I don't even own a car. it goes against my personal beliefs. I would rather take public transportation and give the planet a break.

[idkew]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?


well, normally that would not be a concern, but there is a rapist on the loose here in lincoln park, and he has struck several times.

i always walk my g- (oh wait, gotta be pc here) Significant Other to the car. but, i normally do anyway, because it is what you do. you walk your Significant Other to the car, even if you lived in BFE (http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?String=exact&Acronym=bfe&Find=Find). or is chivalry sexist now, too?

[mactastic]

well, normally that would not be a concern, but there is a rapist on the loose here in lincoln park, and he has struck several times.

i always walk my g- (oh wait, gotta be pc here) Significant Other to the car. but, i normally do anyway, because it is what you do. you walk your Significant Other to the car, even if you lived in BFE (http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?String=exact&Acronym=bfe&Find=Find). or is chivalry sexist now, too?

I'm not asking if you are concerned for her. Are you ever concerned for yourself when you walk alone in deserted areas that do not have a reputation for violence?

[mactastic]

I don't even own a car. it goes against my personal beliefs. I would rather take public transportation and give the planet a break.

OK, are you concerned for your saftey when you have a few drinks at the pub and walk home at night? Or do you not drink either? ;)

[blue&whiteman]

OK, are you concerned for your saftey when you have a few drinks at the pub and walk home at night? Or do you not drink either? ;)

no, don't drink :) I have been a victim of violence once but I still pretty much feel safe when walking alone.

the one time I was a victim I was walking home minding my own and some big guy asked me if I had any drugs for sale. I right away said "uh, no. don't ask me that and leave me alone". he then kicked me right in the ribs and said I was lucky he didn't kill me. I never even tried to hit him back because of my anti-violent buddhist ways. I did doubt the human race for a couple days but all has been fine since.

[idkew]

I'm not asking if you are concerned for her. Are you ever concerned for yourself when you walk alone in deserted areas that do not have a reputation for violence?

there are definitely areas within walking distance of me i would not feel comfortable to walk at night through.

places that require these (http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-cam07.html).

[wwidgirl]

and as for you being against pet names. i don't see them as a bad thing. i don't understand how a pet name could be demeaning. it is not like men call their loved one bitch, hoe and such (and expect a response, and her around anymore). not to mention, women use pet names just as much, if not more. i don't know how many times i have been called honey by a woman with which i am not involved. besides, i think life would get old very quick if husbands were to call their wives Mrs. XXXX all the time. Pets names are what to people in love use to converse with each other. Maybe this is why you are so against them. Jaded?
No, actually I'm not jaded at all. I do refer to the person I love by his first name- could just be a personal thing.
I wasn't talking so much about "pet names". I was thinking more in terms of strangers referring to me in those terms. Where I work, I get referred to as sweetheart and honey all the time and I find it rather belittleling.


once again, you are blind to all but your side of the argument. looks say a lot about a man also. ever hear of muscle head? just because a man chooses to be fit and strong does not make them dumb. same goes for jock. what about men with grey hair? some see that as a mark of wisdom, but it is merely the lack of coloring in the hair, not an addition of knowledge to the mind. fat man are considered lazy and worthless by the masses. thin, tall men are considered successful (and promoted quicker). strong chins can help get you promoted. yes, men can look neutral, just as a woman can look neutral. are you using The Apprentice or other TV as your basis for arguments?

I never said that how a man looks DOESN'T reflect an "inner quality" so to speak, HOWEVER it IS possible for a man to be neutral. Not all men choose to be neutral but it IS possible. Women cannot look neutral. Women, can never just "be". I'm using my own life as an example. No matter how a woman looks, it says something about her personality. What does the Apprentice or tv have to do with it? I have never seen that show. please explain.


you think that men are not expected to look handsome? you think that if a man walked into a business meeting wearing a 3 day old beard, greasy face and hair, and holy jeans he has worn for a week, you think he would be taken seriously? a man is forced to dress the part, just as a woman is forced to dress a part. they are different, thank god, but each sex has an accepted look. i would like to be able to wear jeans and a t shirt to work, but that is not how the business world works.

Are you actually trying to claim that men feel the same pressure as women to look good? I would disagree. Women are required to do much more in order to look attractive- however, there is growing pressure for men to look a certain way (work out, be tall, etc), even so it does not yet match the pressure on women.


also - it seems you are blaming society (a.k.a. - men, it seems in your view) that women are "forced" to look attractive. you should go out and listen to women talk. go watch some women tear apart the looks of another woman. it is less the man the "forces" this look upon women, than women themselves.


I am actually not blaming just men, nor do I believe that it is necessarily done consciously. SOCIETY includes women, I blame them (me included) too.


i don't think i have ever seen more than one newscast without a woman anchor. they are not the comic relief, they are not the stupid echo (as kelly is). they are just another spoke in the newscast wheel. same as the men.

Women newsanchors are comparatively rare although there are women as secondary news people (ie. reporters, weatherreporters, etc) and they are usually required to be young and attractive UNLIKE males who are required to look respectable (= OLD). I'm not pulling this out of my ass, there have been studies done and when I have the time (not right now) I will go look for my books. There have been cases where women have been hired for looking a certain way and fired for no longer looking that way (and lawsuits were filed - i will have to look up how these lawsuits were concluded).

and i still want to know why you think that a 9-5 job exempts the man from any housework or child-rearing. that one shows blatant sexism on your part.
I definitely do not think that is the case, however, the stay-at-home moms I have talked to say they're husbands DO (admittedly not a large group of people)

Sorry I couldn't go into more detail with this post. I am currently studying for exams and am FRIGGIN SWAMPED!

[Neserk]

Just a few quick thoughts.

language is not neutral.
I dislike when women are referred to as "girl" (yes I realise this is ironic considering my username but this is a name I picked when I was much younger!) or "sweetheart" or "honey".


For me, it depends on the context. Having a girls night out is okay but the girls at the office is derogatory. When I was watching Fear Factor last night and Joe kept refering to the contestants as "girls" when they are all 20+ I think it derogatory. If women refer to themselves as a group of girls or someone refers to a group of adults as "boys and girls" it is okay, imo.

I don't mind terms of affection. I use them all the time. But I understand that for some it is offensive. I guess it depends on who is saying it and *how* they are saying it.


I don't necessarily believe that women are oppressed in an obvious sense (ie. not getting hired because of their sex). I think sexism is much more subtle than that.


It is both subtle and obviuos. If you want to be a teacher in an elementary school setting and are male you *will* get hired. Just because you are male and there are not that many in Elementary Schools. Some jobs are more difficult to get because you are female. Women are not seen as *suitable* for certain positions.

[mactastic]

For me, it depends on the context. Having a girls night out is okay but the girls at the office is derogatory. When I was watching Fear Factor last night and Joe kept refering to the contestants as "girls" when they are all 20+ I think it derogatory. If women refer to themselves as a group of girls or someone refers to a group of adults as "boys and girls" it is okay, imo.


Is it OK to refer to a stranger as 'hon'?

[blue&whiteman]

Is it OK to refer to a stranger as 'hon'?

I don't think it is ok. I think if someone is a total stranger and you need to ask them something or say something to them that you should simply say "excuse me". hon is a bit personal.

[mactastic]

I don't think it is ok. I think if someone is a total stranger and you need to ask them something or say something to them that you should simply say "excuse me". hon is a bit personal.

I don't think it's ok either, particularly when that stranger has asked you specifically not to. I'm curious what Neserk will say however.

[pseudobrit]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?

Never, not even in an indecent neighborhood. I like walking down seedy alleyways alone.

If someone makes the mistake of ****ing with me they deserve whatever would happen to them. No one has tried yet. If I'm near my car when they do, they'd make the double mistake of putting me at arm's length of whichever I grab of the half dozen hockey sticks I keep in my car.

[idkew]

Is it OK to refer to a stranger as 'hon'?

but, when someone calls you hon, they may be attempting to either belittle you, or make you less guarded, and more open to help them.

i.e. "hon, gave you please give me a hand?"

tat may go over better than "hey you, can you pick that up for me?"

[idkew]

Never, not even in an indecent neighborhood. I like walking down seedy alleyways alone.

If someone makes the mistake of ****ing with me they deserve whatever would happen to them. No one has tried yet. If I'm near my car when they do, they'd make the double mistake of putting me at arm's length of whichever I grab of the half dozen hockey sticks I keep in my car.

what about the mugger with a knife or gun, one which has no qualms about using either? they may actually still attack you, even if you are cooperative?

[wwidgirl]

but, when someone calls you hon, they may be attempting to either belittle you, or make you less guarded, and more open to help them.

i.e. "hon, gave you please give me a hand?"

tat may go over better than "hey you, can you pick that up for me?"

Even seeing it written makes me cringe.

[idkew]

Even seeing it written makes me cringe.

hey, i never said it was right. i am just pointing things out.

[pseudobrit]

what about the mugger with a knife or gun, one which has no qualms about using either? they may actually still attack you, even if you are cooperative?

Well, not much you can do about a psycho with a gun who intends to use it on you, now can you? I have no qualms about taking a knife in the hand if it means I can disarm him (no pun intended) and ruin his ****.

[mactastic]

Even seeing it written makes me cringe.

Yeah, there's only one person who's earned the right to call me that. Whenever anyone else says it, I assume they are trying to belittle me.

[Frohickey]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?

Thats why I agree with Ann Coulter (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter051600.asp) when she wrote "The greatest beneficiaries of concealed carry laws -- whether they personally choose to carry -- are women and the elderly."

She is wrong though in her last paragraph

"The most dangerous action a woman can take when faced with a criminal is to resist with her fists: That tends to annoy violent criminals, and the woman will very likely be seriously injured. But a woman who takes the advice of Handgun Control Inc. and passively submits is 2.5 times more likely to be injured than a woman who resists with a gun. So if you don't want to lie back and enjoy it, get a gun. Otherwise you may never become a mom."

You might become a mom, but it would be for the rapist's child. :eek:

[Frohickey]

Well, not much you can do about a psycho with a gun who intends to use it on you, now can you? I have no qualms about taking a knife in the hand if it means I can disarm him (no pun intended) and ruin his ****.

Hate to say it, but if a psycho already has a gun in hand, while you still have an unopened knife in your pocket, you are already behind the 8-ball.

[mactastic]

Hate to say it, but if a psycho already has a gun in hand, while you still have an unopened knife in your pocket, you are already behind the 8-ball.

I don't tend to keep my kung fu in my pocket. :D

[pseudobrit]

Hate to say it, but if a psycho already has a gun in hand, while you still have an unopened knife in your pocket, you are already behind the 8-ball.

I wasn't talking about a knife in my pocket, I was talking about getting stabbed in the hand myself in order to disarm an attacker.

And if I'm facing the barrel of a gun and someone who intends to use it on me, nothing is going to help me other than the unlikely event of his weapon jamming or him being an awful shot several times.

[mactastic]

I wasn't talking about a knife in my pocket, I was talking about getting stabbed in the hand myself in order to disarm an attacker.

And if I'm facing the barrel of a gun and someone who intends to use it on me, nothing is going to help me other than the unlikely event of his weapon jamming or him being an awful shot several times.

It's ok, he's just using it as an excuse to bring guns into yet another thread. Cause a woman will only be equal to a man once she has a gun, don't you know?

[idkew]

Well, not much you can do about a psycho with a gun who intends to use it on you, now can you? I have no qualms about taking a knife in the hand if it means I can disarm him (no pun intended) and ruin his ****.


so you are telling me that if you are in an area know for this type of violence, you would not be the least bit apprehensive walking alone there at night?

[Frohickey]

so you are telling me that if you are in an area know for this type of violence, you would not be the least bit apprehensive walking alone there at night?

Wow... Pseudobrit ought to join the Marines. He would be right at home partrollng Fallujah. :D

[Frohickey]

It's ok, he's just using it as an excuse to bring guns into yet another thread. Cause a woman will only be equal to a man once she has a gun, don't you know?

I didn't bring it in. And yes, it can level the playing field for the weaker (upper body strength) sex (but man, they can tolerate a lot of pain, as indicated by that Mexican self-C-section woman).

[pseudobrit]

so you are telling me that if you are in an area know for this type of violence, you would not be the least bit apprehensive walking alone there at night?

No. I refuse to live my life in fear.

Besides, even if you're walking down the street in a war-torn city, the chances of you being attacked are still a lot lower than TV would have you think your chances walking down an alley in the USA are.

[mactastic]

I didn't bring it in. And yes, it can level the playing field for the weaker (upper body strength) sex (but man, they can tolerate a lot of pain, as indicated by that Mexican self-C-section woman).

Frohickey, I believe your post quoting that piece of trash Coulter was the very_first_mention of guns in this thread. Feel free to prove me wrong if I missed an earlier mention.

[pseudobrit]

Frohickey, I believe your post quoting that piece of trash Coulter was the very_first_mention of guns in this thread. Feel free to prove me wrong if I missed an earlier mention.

You missed an earlier mention, but he was the first to bring guns into the debate in the context of the Coulter quote (gun rights/ gun=good stance).

[mactastic]

Ah that's right, the mugger with the gun. Regardless, he's the first to try to use this as a springboard to talking about gun rights and hijacking yet another thread with it. I suggest we stop feeding into it, at least in this thread.

[Frohickey]

Ah that's right, the mugger with the gun. Regardless, he's the first to try to use this as a springboard to talking about gun rights and hijacking yet another thread with it. I suggest we stop feeding into it, at least in this thread.

Ever take Reading Comprehension 101? ;)

[Frohickey]

You missed an earlier mention, but he was the first to bring guns into the debate in the context of the Coulter quote (gun rights/ gun=good stance).

Title of the thread is 'Equality for women - how far has it come really?'

Equality in resisting violence... sounds like a perfectly applicable subject for this thread.


But hey, if you are willing to artifically limit the scope of the discussion in order to indemnify your own personal biases against inanimate objects... who am I to argue. :rolleyes:

[Frohickey]

You missed an earlier mention, but he was the first to bring guns into the debate in the context of the Coulter quote (gun rights/ gun=good stance).

Here's a picture instead.
http://www.anncoulter.org/images/webimages/gun.jpg
:eek: :D

[pseudobrit]

But hey, if you are willing to artifically limit the scope of the discussion in order to indemnify your own personal biases against inanimate objects... who am I to argue. :rolleyes:

I never attempted to make such a limitation, so don't play the victim with me, Frohickey.

[Frohickey]

I never attempted to make such a limitation, so don't play the victim with me, Frohickey.

Sorry, I got quote button happy. That was an answer to mactastic's post. :D

[Krizoitz]

I demand my second ammendmant right to keep and arm bears!
We'll see how much of a sport hunters think it is then, heh.

Oh and to keep this on topic, I would keep and arm female bears equally as male bears.

[mactastic]

Title of the thread is 'Equality for women - how far has it come really?'

Equality in resisting violence... sounds like a perfectly applicable subject for this thread.


But hey, if you are willing to artifically limit the scope of the discussion in order to indemnify your own personal biases against inanimate objects... who am I to argue. :rolleyes:

Haha....if you want to go off topic start your own thread. Whaaaaaa :D

[idkew]

I demand my second ammendmant right to keep and arm bears!
We'll see how much of a sport hunters think it is then, heh.

Oh and to keep this on topic, I would keep and arm female bears equally as male bears.

how many arms would you like them to have?

[Krizoitz]

how many arms would you like them to have?

not arms as in limbs. arms as in guns. I want to train bears to use guns! Keep and arm bears! Its not my fault that the people who copied down the constitution got it backwards.

http://www.just4yucks.com/images/5x/58305.gif

[idkew]

not arms as in limbs. arms as in guns. I want to train bears to use guns! Keep and arm bears! Its not my fault that the people who copied down the constitution got it backwards.



no $*|t sherlock. you made a pun, i made a pun.

[idkew]

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/04/14/hockey.death.ap/index.html)
$1.2 million settlement in hockey puck death

Agreement between girl's parents, NHL unsealed

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- The parents of a 13-year-old girl killed by a hockey puck got $1.2 million in a settlement with the National Hockey League and other groups, according to a copy of the agreement made public Wednesday under an appeals court order.

Brittanie Cecil's family reached the settlement last year, but it was sealed until Wednesday, when the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that it was a public record and must be made public in response to a request from WBNS-TV of Columbus.

Brittanie died after being struck at a March 2002 Columbus Blue Jackets game.

The team, the NHL and Nationwide Arena agreed to pay $705,000 to Jody Sergent, the girl's mother, and $470,000 to David Cecil, the girl's father.

The high court ruled 6-1 that Preble County Probate Judge Wilfred Dues erred in creating an exception to the state's public records laws to protect the family's privacy rights.

Attorneys for the family received an additional $538,000, the settlement said. It also included $13,000 for funeral expenses.


As you can see, men still have little rights when it comes to their family. According to this ruling, the mother was twice as hurt by the death of her child than the father.

[Neserk]

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/04/14/hockey.death.ap/index.html)



As you can see, men still have little rights when it comes to their family. According to this ruling, the mother was twice as hurt by the death of her child than the father.


I'm guessing because mom spent more time with the daughter than did the father, hence her measurable loss is greater. That is interesting. Were the parent's divorced? I've not heard of parent's being awarded *separately* before.

[Neserk]

How many of the men here worry about walking to their car alone at night - even in a decent neighborhood?


I take 2 classes from 4-7. Until Daylight Savings time I was walking on a college campus, after dark, alone to my car. I hated it. Now that it is daylight still at 7 it is no big deal. I was telling one of the guys in my class this and it amazed him that I would even be concerned.

[Neserk]

Is it OK to refer to a stranger as 'hon'?

Depends on how it is being said. When females do it, no big deal. When males do it depends on the tone they use.

[Neserk]

I don't think it is ok. I think if someone is a total stranger and you need to ask them something or say something to them that you should simply say "excuse me". hon is a bit personal.

I see it as being kind. It shows concern rather than being rude.

[idkew]

I'm guessing because mom spent more time with the daughter than did the father, hence her measurable loss is greater. That is interesting. Were the parent's divorced? I've not heard of parent's being awarded *separately* before.

that could be that answer. or the man could be spending more time with the daughter. anyone want to find out the whole story? i am not motivated.

[Frohickey]

I take 2 classes from 4-7. Until Daylight Savings time I was walking on a college campus, after dark, alone to my car. I hated it. Now that it is daylight still at 7 it is no big deal. I was telling one of the guys in my class this and it amazed him that I would even be concerned.

Guy in your class is in Condition White.
You must be in Condition Yellow.

[blackfox]

No. I refuse to live my life in fear.

Besides, even if you're walking down the street in a war-torn city, the chances of you being attacked are still a lot lower than TV would have you think your chances walking down an alley in the USA are.
Sensible policy. You are also less likely to be attacked in US cities than you would think. Domestic news seems to make the US seem more violent than it is...either way, bad things happen sometimes, despite precautions, but in fear is no way to live.

[Frohickey]

Sensible policy. You are also less likely to be attacked in US cities than you would think. Domestic news seems to make the US seem more violent than it is...either way, bad things happen sometimes, despite precautions, but in fear is no way to live.

Actually, crime rates in the United States are lower than they are for other countries. Like you said, domestic news seems to make the US seem more violent than it really is. To make it more spectacular, comparisons are usually made with other countries, but total crime numbers are used instead of crime rates.

[Neserk]

Guy in your class is in Condition White.
You must be in Condition Yellow.

:confused:

[Neserk]

Yeah, there's only one person who's earned the right to call me that. Whenever anyone else says it, I assume they are trying to belittle me.


That is a shame. Human communication is very complex. Making assumptions like that must make your life pretty miserable. Do you do it often or just with terms of endearment?

[Neserk]

I don't think it's ok either, particularly when that stranger has asked you specifically not to. I'm curious what Neserk will say however.


Has someone called you "hon" after you told them not to?

When in heated debate you should not make yourself vulnerable by telling someone that you are personally sensitve to a particular word or phrase ;) Oh, wait, does winking also bother you? Am I offending you? Should I stop?

Come to think of it considering the heated debate we were in I think that since there are no negative connotations to "Hon, sweetheart, sweetie, darling" etc I should use all of them when addressing you. If you are so open to using something that might be derogartory to a historically oppressed group of people why can't I use something that is offensive to you?

Makes you think, or does it? Sw...

[mactastic]

Depends on how it is being said. When females do it, no big deal. When males do it depends on the tone they use.

That's the biggest load of double standard BS I've heard in a long time. How can you be so worried that someone might possibly be offended by a word that sounds like another word, yet be so callous when it comes to a word that is used to demean people? And what's worse is that when you were asked NOT to call me hon, your response was 'I'll most likely call you hon again'. How can you justify such a double standard, particularly in light of the ferocity of your attack against anything YOU deem offensive?

[Ugg]

Depends on how it is being said. When females do it, no big deal. When males do it depends on the tone they use.

Every time I get called hon by a woman I don't know I either assume she's from the south or that she has designs on my body or she is being patronizing. I personally find it highly offensive. It's a term that should only be used amongst family and friends, IMHO not with people you don't know.

[Frohickey]

Every time I get called hon by a woman I don't know I either assume she's from the south or that she has designs on my body or she is being patronizing. I personally find it highly offensive. It's a term that should only be used amongst family and friends, IMHO not with people you don't know.

I wonder how long of a time frame is required in order to substantially decrease the density of the epidermal layer of homo sapiens. Must have been recent though. I still hear old timers saying "Sticks and stones may break my bones...". :eek: :D

[Frohickey]

:confused:

The Awareness Spectrum (http://www.albany.edu/ssw/projectsafe/awareness.html)

Condition White
This is a state of environmental unawareness. You are oblivious to what's going on around you, because you are daydreaming; tired; preoccupied with distractions; or assuming there is no possibility of trouble and thus no cause for alarm. It is important to keep a Condition White level of awareness for when you are at home - in a safe environment where you can relax. Never occupy a Condition White level of awareness when you are "on the street " or working in the community!

Condition Yellow
You are relaxed but alert, cautious but not tense. You maintain an easy but steady 360-degree surveillance of the people, places, things and action around you. You are not specifically expecting a hostile act, but you are aware that aggression is possible. Because you are constantly perceiving and evaluating your environment, you are attuned to any signal that may suggest a threat potential. Your alertness is a preliminary step to action. Condition Yellow is the suggested minimum level of awareness to be maintained during your work day.

Condition Orange
This is a state of alarm. You know there is trouble, and you're concentrating on evaluating it further and resolving it. Based upon the specific situation and your individual training and education, experience, common sense, your intuitive "gut" feeling - you begin to formulate a plan. The plan may involve running away/disengaging, calling for back-up/assistance - depending on the situation. You need to begin focusing on deep breathing and slowing your breath to control your physiological arousal. Concurrently, you need to activate problem-solving and coping self-talk to keep yourself centered.

Condition Red
At this point what looks wrong is wrong. Instant reaction is mandatory. At this point it is truly fight or flight. The threat confronting you needs to be contained, controlled, and neutralized OR you need to disengage QUICKLY and IMMEDIATELY in order to preserve your safety! All systems are GO - your adrenaline, heart rate, and associated physiological reactions are now at their peak. Despite this state of urgency, one needs to maintain one's presence of mind. The decisions you make are not "knee- jerk" reactions, but rather, rational decisions based on the unfolding threat.

Condition Black
Without proper training and preparation for crisis situations, an individual runs the risk of moving quickly from a Condition White into Condition Black. This is something to be avoided at all cost! Condition Black is characterized by panic ... misdirected frenzy ... paralysis.

[Neserk]

That's the biggest load of double standard BS I've heard in a long time.


I don't think you know what BS is...



How can you be so worried that someone might possibly be offended by a word that sounds like another word, yet be so callous when it comes to a word that is used to demean people?


"Hon" is not intended to demean people. Your lack of empathy for others is pathetic. Your inability to see that not using a word that *is* derogatory is at a higher level than using a word that *is not* derogatory is telling.


And what's worse is that when you were asked NOT to call me hon, your response was 'I'll most likely call you hon again'. How can you justify such a double standard, particularly in light of the ferocity of your attack against anything YOU deem offensive?

Once again, this isn't about me. This is about others. Although apparently you fully intend to make it about you and your beliefs, and wishes, and desires. I guess in your world others are not as important as you.

[Neserk]

Every time I get called hon by a woman I don't know I either assume she's from the south or that she has designs on my body or she is being patronizing.


Most likely from the South or none of the above. There is no reason to see her as being partronizing, because she is not being so. I've never seen it used that way.


I personally find it highly offensive. It's a term that should only be used amongst family and friends, IMHO not with people you don't know.


I find that very odd. It is okay for your family and friends to be offensive?

[Ugg]

Most likely from the South or none of the above. There is no reason to see her as being partronizing, because she is not being so. I've never seen it used that way.

I find that very odd. It is okay for your family and friends to be offensive?

Neither my family nor my friends would use such a term so I can't speak from personal experience. Perhaps my northern roots excluded me from using such a familiar term but nonetheless it implies a closeness or intimacy. I worked with a woman once who always used "dear" or "hon" or "sweetie" when talking to co-workers. I can't even begin to tell you how irksome it was. She was from the south so in the name of tolerance I lived with it. Funny how southern women are excused from bad behaviour but southern men rarely are....

[Krizoitz]

Most likely from the South or none of the above. There is no reason to see her as being partronizing, because she is not being so. I've never seen it used that way.

So its only patronizing if you think it is? If Ugg finds it patronizing then why use it, other than to continue to harrass? It is a disturbing double standard that you feel only terms that you find offensive are ones people should be mindful of.




I find that very odd. It is okay for your family and friends to be offensive?
It is a term of familiarty and endearment. In many cultures you don't tell your given name to anyone outside of your closest group of friends. For someone else to use it is rude. This may be similar. It is perfectly acceptable for someone close to you to refer to you in such a familiar way, but it is uncomortable to be refered to that way by others.

I'd also like to know if you think its ok for black people to use the n-word amongst themselves?

[mactastic]

Neserk, I'd like to hear more about why you feel it's ok for women to use the term but not men. That seems like the very kind of sexism the woman's movement fought against. You will create a backlash against the woman's movement by using such sexist language. I surely doubt you want to be back in a society that deems certain behavior appropriate for men and not women, so why would you assume it's ok to do the reverse?

And can you respond without the personal insults this time?

[Neserk]

Neither my family nor my friends would use such a term so I can't speak from personal experience. Perhaps my northern roots excluded me from using such a familiar term but nonetheless it implies a closeness or intimacy.


I am from the North as well, Michigan to be specific. So it can not be that...
[/quote]
I worked with a woman once who always used "dear" or "hon" or "sweetie" when talking to co-workers. I can't even begin to tell you how irksome it was. She was from the south so in the name of tolerance I lived with it. Funny how southern women are excused from bad behaviour but southern men rarely are....[/QUOTE]

That is because using terms of endearment is *not* bad behavior.

[Neserk]

Neserk, I'd like to hear more about why you feel it's ok for women to use the term but not men.


That is not what I said. I said that it *can* be offensive depending on how the male uses it.

The reason? Because men are still more powerful than women.


That seems like the very kind of sexism the woman's movement fought against. You will create a backlash against the woman's movement by using such sexist language.


There is nothing sexist about it.


I surely doubt you want to be back in a society that deems certain behavior appropriate for men and not women, so why would you assume it's ok to do the reverse?


We haven't left a society that deems certain behavior appropriate for males and other behavior appropriate for females.



And can you respond without the personal insults this time?

Why should I when you don't? Was the above comment even necessary except to be insulting?

Here is an idea: Don't respond to what I say. I won't respond to what you say. For whatever reason you felt it necessary to drag an argument from another thread to this thread. Let it go, get over it, or just ignore me.

[Ugg]

I am from the North as well, Michigan to be specific. So it can not be that...

I worked with a woman once who always used "dear" or "hon" or "sweetie" when talking to co-workers. I can't even begin to tell you how irksome it was. She was from the south so in the name of tolerance I lived with it. Funny how southern women are excused from bad behaviour but southern men rarely are....[/QUOTE]

That is because using terms of endearment is *not* bad behavior.[/QUOTE]

I don't get it, you're saying that anyone who uses the above terms is using them only with the best intentions? Whether male or female?

I still say that terms of endearment should only be used, by definition really to those whom one is close to. Maybe this is truly one of those cultural issues that ends up being a roadblock, it that's the case, then all I can say is that you have every right to use the word(s) and I have every right to let you know I find them offensive.

[Neserk]

I don't get it, you're saying that anyone who uses the above terms is using them only with the best intentions? Whether male or female?

No, males can use them and be slimey about it.


I still say that terms of endearment should only be used, by definition really to those whom one is close to. Maybe this is truly one of those cultural issues that ends up being a roadblock, it that's the case, then all I can say is that you have every right to use the word(s) and I have every right to let you know I find them offensive.

I'll be sure not to call you dear or hon ;)

[billwest9999]

No, males can use them and be slimey about it.



I'll be sure not to call you dear or hon ;)

Neserk is one of those women who ALWAYS offer reasons when they want to have it their way. They provide evidence for situations in which they were discriminated against, and all sorts of stats, stories, PERSONAL experience...etc to make it look like they are the victim. Well, tell you what, the world is not a fair place to begin with. Just look at all the people who are in poverty, developing countries...etc. So just suck it up and live with what you have, and stop complaining that men are always unfair to you and are out to get you. Quite frankly, we are not out to get you, and the way you act probably is the reason why they treated you the way the did in the first place.

Let me say that, Neserk, I wish you well in your life. You would be a much happier woman if you stop complaining and start living your life the way it is. Many people are discriminated against, whether it be sex, religion, age, looks, intelligence, disability...

I'm so sick and tired of your complaints. If you don't like men, don't associate yourself with them. Otherwise, stop complaining.

[Neserk]

Edit:

Here is a better idea. Since you don't like what I say why don't you just put me on your ignore list. Then you won't have to read all the alleged complaining I do!

[Krizoitz]

I don't know if you'll even read this neserk but Billywest isn't that far off. In many of your posts you attack the people making the posts simply because you disagree with them. You dismiss their arguments as beneath you or completly out of line but you seem to be the only person who sees them that way.

I'm not saying that you don't have a right to disagree, absolutely you do. But you really do act like you have a large chip on your shoulder against a variety of groups. You make sweeping statements about mine and others opinions, especially in regards to men/sexism, accusing us of all being the same.

We aren't all out to get you, we may not agree with you, but we aren't all out to get you. If you would give us and our opinions half a chance you might learn something. You don't have to agree with us but if you take the time to read through the arguments you'll see that I as well as others take a lot of time to put out thoughtful posts and go out of our way to keep from harassing individual users.

You would do us all a favor if you would take a deep breath and give us a chance.

[mactastic]

That is not what I said. I said that it *can* be offensive depending on how the male uses it.
Did you or did you not say that it was ok for a woman to use the term 'hon' yet it was not ok for a man to?

The reason? Because men are still more powerful than women.

I agree with you here. But aiming for switching that role is unacceptable to me. Equality is the goal, not a return to a female-dominated society.


There is nothing sexist about it.

Yes there is. :D

How's that for an argument? Can you come up with something better than 'no it isn't' for a response? Tell me WHY you don't think it is sexist to have two seperate classes of what is acceptable based on what gender you are.


We haven't left a society that deems certain behavior appropriate for males and other behavior appropriate for females.

Agreed. Why perpetuate it further, albeit in the opposite direction?


Why should I when you don't? Was the above comment even necessary except to be insulting?

I asked you in the utmost sincerity. I'm interested in how you can hold seemingly opposing views on issues. I'm not the one who called someone pathetic. And no, my comment was not meant to be insulting to you whatsoever.

Here is an idea: Don't respond to what I say. I won't respond to what you say. For whatever reason you felt it necessary to drag an argument from another thread to this thread. Let it go, get over it, or just ignore me.

If you can't be consistent in your view across threads your credibility with me is zero. Anyone can argue one side of any issue. A worldview means you have beliefs you apply to situations to determine what your position should be, and if you apply one set of standards to one situation and another set of standards to a similar situation then you are practicing hipocrisy.

I'm sorry if you feel as if I'm attacking you personally. I'm not. If you no longer want to discuss issues with me after this then fine. You'll hear no more from me on your posts. :(

[Frohickey]

I agree with you here. But aiming for switching that role is unacceptable to me. Equality is the goal, not a return to a female-dominated society.

I agree. We don't need a female-dominated society. Imagine all of the leather whips, latex-outerwear, and stilleto heels that would have to be made in order to support that type of society. Hmm... waitaminute... You might have something there. :rolleyes:

[mactastic]

I agree. We don't need a female-dominated society. Imagine all of the leather whips, latex-outerwear, and stilleto heels that would have to be made in order to support that type of society. Hmm... waitaminute... You might have something there. :rolleyes:

Yeah, you got a warped view of women pal. I'm guessing your single? :p