Modern Feminism - What's the deal?

[Deleted]

This assumes so much that's just plain false. It's hard to even know where to begin. It's even harder for me to not just assume that you're trolling the thread.

Feel free to prove me wrong. True equality is impossible.

[Cybran]

I don't think anyone has used the phrase 'fighting male pigs' but you.

There's still a lot of residual "tradition" of the men being in charge, but that's eroding away as more and more young women pursue their careers and goals without being artificially held back.

It's exactly what he said. He claims that the lack of women in management is SOLELY the result of men being sexist pigs that "hold women back".

These countries found these programs necessary to combat lingering sexism in their society. We're never going to be able to seperate nature from nurture until we do away with idiotic ideas that because men hunted for meat in the stone age they're naturally better at running companies.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2...ed-differently

Maps of neural circuitry showed that on average women's brains were highly connected across the left and right hemispheres, in contrast to men's brains, where the connections were typically stronger between the front and back regions.

Ragini Verma, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, said the greatest surprise was how much the findings supported old stereotypes, with men's brains apparently wired more for perception and co-ordinated actions, and women's for social skills and memory, making them better equipped for multitasking.

"If you look at functional studies, the left of the brain is more for logical thinking, the right of the brain is for more intuitive thinking. So if there's a task that involves doing both of those things, it would seem that women are hardwired to do those better," Verma said. "Women are better at intuitive thinking. Women are better at remembering things. When you talk, women are more emotionally involved – they will listen more."

Hunting and gathering effected human evolution severely. It's foolish to ignore sexual dimorphism.

[DisposableHero]

The irony never ceases to amaze me. Men have lost their self-respect.

You cannot expect men to grow up with self respect if society teaches them as boys to be ashamed of everything they are.

The vilification of male sexuality through rape hysteria. The concepts of male disposability that permeate our society. The insistence on teach young men to idolize self sacrifice and define their worth through the approval of women. The billions of dollars in additional opportunities we afford to women in education and careers, in medical research, support for mental health and abuse shelters.

It should come as no surprise that precious few men value themselves and have self respect.

[Grannon]

Here is the problem. They have concluded that lingering sexism is the problem without evidence that it is in fact the reason for the differences they observe. Men and women have different inclinations and as a large group gravitate towards different lifestyles, professions, etc. The problem in a lot of cases is that no one has taken the time to evaluate if we observe more men in certain career paths because there is a barrier for women to pursue that career path or because a larger percentage of women are simply not inclined to pursue it.

Bullshit. There's tons of research.

If the differences are purely biological, why are girls performing better in math in some countries than others? Why did they perform so much worse a few decades ago? Did our biology change abruptly when women started demanding to be educated fairly? And did that biological change have more impact in some nations than others? Or was there maybe something else at play keeping their performance artificially low?

Women evolved to raise children. Feminism is fighting nature.

Prove it. Cite some real sources or GTFO.

I love how you twisted my words. You'd make Communist revolutionaries proud. I said that poverty creates crime, which it does.

Men just happen to be the biggest victims of poverty in this society (most homeless people are men for example) because we live in a mostly service sector economy thanks to greedy people shipping most of our manufacturing to China and outsourcing jobs to India etc.

I've already established that men are not disproportionately affected by poverty. More men are living homeless in the U.S., but that's a hell of a lot more complicated than you're making it out to be. It's certainly not because women have better access to jobs than men do: see the wage gap, which is more dramatic in low and high earning careers than it is in the middle.

Poverty creates crime. The fact that minorities are more effected by it just proves that they are less able to adapt. I suppose this is the part where you claim that I have white male privilege, right?

No, it's actually where you demonstrate that you're racist as well as sexist. :-)

Sorry but raising children in a cave hardly compares to men creating miniature black holes at CERN.

Nor does killing things with spears. But prehistoric women contributed a lot more to their social groups than just sitting in 'caves' raising children. And it's already been well established why there are more men in the sciences.

No one is stopping them. If anyone is literally stopping women from succeeding then I will be the first to try to end that injustice.

But now that you mention it, yes, men are naturally better at science, math and highly specialized jobs. Etc etc etc.

Well, I doubt that you personally are stopping anyone from doing anything because you're clearly a loon, but yes, the research is that attitudes towards women's abilities and aptitudes has more influence on their representation in STEM than any supposed biological difference.

And guess who will change the world? That's right: mostly men.

The next time you upgrade your computer remember that men designed the parts. Remember that men with guns are protecting you from harm.

Don't lecture us on privilege while we literally built and protect the world you live in.

Don't speak for all men, please. It's gross. You're essentially saying "women shouldn't want equal opportunities because they've never had them before." That's a dumb argument. I've see

All I asked for were simple links and you will do anything but provide them.

I did provide them. I just took out the sensitive information first. The format is still there and anyone who also has access would be able to verify that. Anyone who doesn't wouldn't know if the link was valid or not anyway. The better test would be to access the full texts of those articles yourself, which as I explained, many people can do through their public library. It's not my fault you don't do enough real research to know how to access the resources you need. I'm not going to stick to lower quality sources just because you think I"m a liar and can't be bothered to find out for yourself if it's true.

I heavily scrutinize things coming from "social science" sources since they tend to misrepresent what the numbers mean and folks such as yourself are happy with their explanation instead of looking deeper.

lolno. They just tend to demonstrate truths you don't agree with. You can't discount every field of study that examines at why we behave the way we do and then expect to be taken seriously in a conversation about why we behave the way we do.

And how do you propose to prove that the reason they are passed over was due to their gender? That is already illegal and can be resolved via the legal system. You are just pointing out that women (as a whole) make less than men (as a whole), want to ignore that a man and woman working side by side doing the same thing get paid the same amount, and say that it is society oppressing them. How is it that an independent thinking adult women seems incapable of making a decision of her own, according to what you are saying that is?

I'm not claiming that women 'aren't capable of making decisions on their own.' I'm talking about women being denied opportunities. No amount of can-do spirit is going to change that. Please stop misrepresenting my argument.

[Deleted]

Bullshit. There's tons of research.

If the differences are purely biological, why are girls performing better in math in some countries than others? Why did they perform so much worse a few decades ago?

[Stir]

Hunting and gathering effected human evolution severely. It's foolish to ignore sexual dimorphism.

Hersenonderzoekster Heidi Johansen-Berg stelt op BBC News stelt dat het onverstandig is om op basis van alleen hersenverbindingen algemene uitspraken te doen over mannen en vrouwen.
"De verbindingen kunnen gedurende je leven op elk moment veranderen door wat je leert of meemaakt."

Transl: Neurobiologist Heidi Johansen-Berg states on BBC News that it is unwise to make general statements about men and women based solely on neural connections. "The connections can change at any moment, during one's entire life, based on what you learn of experience."

Basically: It is foolish to fully ignore sexual dimorphism, but it is equally foolish to ignore the effects of cultural dogma and nurture on the human brain's development. While there is certainly evidence that males are generally more inclined to be hunters than females, it is foolish to assume that therefore hunting was a 'male' thing even if the practice was male-dominant.

Talents and skills are not gender specific. Even if one gender has a higher likelihood of developing a certain talent to its fullest, that by no means rules out the possibility that one not of that gender develops this same talent to its fullest.

[Grannon]

It's exactly what he said. He claims that the lack of women in management is SOLELY the result of men being sexist pigs that "hold women back".

I don't see the phrase 'sexist pigs' in that post. We're talking about a complex social problem here. It's not as simple as 'all men think they're superior.'

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2...ed-differently

See the plethora of research I've provided that demonstrates that the physical differences in our brains do not actually make men naturally better at science. It's not enough to link some pretty pictures from the guardian; you have to show that these differences, and not antiquated social norms, are what accounts for the gender gap in STEM fields.

Hunting and gathering effected human evolution severely. It's foolish to ignore sexual dimorphism.

It's foolish to ignore the mounting research that 'sexual dimorphism' does not make men better at math.

[Deleted]

While there is certainly evidence that males are generally more inclined to be hunters than females, it is foolish to assume that therefore hunting was a 'male' thing even if the practice was male-dominant.

Please one odd woman hunter like what wont make a trend do you have a source for a rate above 5% or something?
Iam curious if we have actually data for a ratio there.

It's foolish to ignore the mounting research that 'sexual dimorphism' does not make men better at math.

Woman are not better at language either then.
What do you think?

[Tulune]

Are people willfully ignoring the fact that most of human history women were treated as lesser and not granted the opportunity to reach their full potential through education and freedom? Of course it's going to be men that get the credit when they are intentionally holding back the other half of their species. It's less biology and more social conditioning than anything else.

Modern feminism takes it too far, but women are people, just like men. There are some differences, but there are differences between individuals as well. Everyone, nem and women, should be given the opportunity to be the best they can be, in whatever field they are passionate for.

[Grannon]

How does that video answer my question about why girls perform better in math now than they did thirty years ago, and why boys and girls perform closer to equally in math in countries where assumptions about gender roles are less pervasive? If women are naturally worse at math their performance should be static.

Woman are not better at language either then.

There you go again, putting words in my mouth. When did I say they were? That's a gender stereotype, too. They're all unproductive and outdated. Are you accepting that it's bunk that men are better at math? Or just saying that only stereotypes that favor men are valid?

[Deleted]

If women are naturally worse at math their performance should be static.

Because you talk in fucking absolutes i do not woman are probably on average worse in math and better in language.

Do you believe woman are better in language?

When did I say they were? That's a gender stereotype, too. They're all unproductive and outdated. Are you accepting that it's bunk that men are better at math?

That ain't no fucking stereotype if you speak like what 20 times the words a day that has to be expected i just wont let you run away with it and claim the same for math or spatial.

Are people willfully ignoring the fact that most of human history women were treated as lesser and not granted the opportunity to reach their full potential through education and freedom?

Still got protection out of the game. Tradeoff between Health/Security and liberty.
People just love to downplay one half.

[Cybran]

See the plethora of research I've provided that demonstrates that the physical differences in our brains do not actually make men naturally better at science. It's not enough to link some pretty pictures from the guardian; you have to show that these differences, and not antiquated social norms, are what accounts for the gender gap in STEM fields.

Your research amounts a few abstracts that were hardly convincing. I am not going to spend 150 euro to read the whole articles. I don't believe that women drop out of STEM fields "because their ideas are ignored by sexist men-pigs".

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/22/8801/F3.large.jpg

The other pretty graph you linked shows that countries where the arbirary "gender gap" is smaller there are more women in Math teams, big whoop. That only means that the more women are promoted in certain fields in certain countries the more of them will end up in the top teams.

[Tulune]

[QUOTE=Still got protection out of the game. Tradeoff between Health/Security and liberty.
People just love to downplay one half.[/QUOTE]

I'm not downplaying anything. I am saying it's a major reason why men have shaped things more throughout history, because they were allowed to do so. That's like saying because we have a govt and an army to protect us we (men and women) don't need access to education and freedom to develop. And security? Really? Women were hurt emotionally and physically because they were considered property, and for the most part, it was ok to do so. So much for security.

All I am saying is PEOPLE, not genders, should be able to be the best they can be. Having more people educated in a society is beneficial.

And I am aware I fail at quoting. :P

[Deleted]

And security? Really? Women were hurt emotionally and physically because they were considered property, and for the most part, it was ok to do so. So much for security.

Trenches of Verdun the Eastfront in WWII.

Yes security don't downplay it you did it right now.

Thats like comparing a broken nail to a face full of mustard gas.

[Xanjori]

It's less biology and more social conditioning than anything else.

Surely thats a misnomer, if it isn't biology how did men get on top? (Not saying I'm agreeing with men should be on top)

[Wells]

Surely thats a misnomer, if it isn't biology how did men get on top? (Not saying I'm agreeing with men should be on top)

But men aren't universally in charge in human society historically. Sure men being more inclined to aggression did help them get into positions of power in a lot of human societies but I don't see why we need to be beholden today to the past.

[Xanjori]

But men aren't universally in charge in human society historically. Sure men being more inclined to aggression did help them get into positions of power in a lot of human societies but I don't see why we need to be beholden today to the past.

We don't, hence the bracketed clause to my question. Today's society has a different set of skill requirements than to society 1/2/3000 years ago.

[Cybran]

Surely thats a misnomer, if it isn't biology how did men get on top? (Not saying I'm agreeing with men should be on top)

When the average lifespan is 35-40 years women were forced to make the most of that time and spend a lot of it pregnant or caring for children. Men had the luxury of free time.

[Wells]

We don't, hence the bracketed clause to my question. Today's society has a different set of skill requirements than to society 1/2/3000 years ago.

One that is almost completely divorced from gender, so I suppose we're in agreement.

[Radux]

This thread has certainly gone full circle, and is far past its need for a close.

Locked.