I don't know...

The counter has an article about how the PETA adverts are horribly sexist.

And some of the comments are going on about how a women's mind is ignored in porn, or something.

Which made me :psyduck:, because who watches porn for stimulating intellectual discussions?

Yeah, I don't get feminism like that.

Ah no wonder I've never heard of this, it isn't an observed day in any civilized post-feminist countries (Canada).

third wave/neofeminism is a ridiculous pile of garbage and anybody who advocates it as anything other than a quick-and-easy path to crapping out a barely-serviceable doctoral thesis should be shot dead.

Hey all you women out there, rest assured that you are being well-represented by all of the finest scholars in academia. Happy Womens' Day!

As an academic discipline in the humanities, are you surprised that it's full of sloppy thinking?

Our ability to have productive discussions, however, would benefit if we moved away from defining camps like "third wave feminism" that can either win or lose, and instead we started to evaluate the truth of individual propositions. The proposition that matters most here is: "Sexism is a problem in contemporary society." If you agree on that, we can work from there. If not, we can argue about it. Either way, we sidestep the useless mudslinging at an ill-defined group of "feminists."

Bahahaha, goodness no.

I agree that sexism is a serious issue on an interpersonal level. However, I disagree that sexism is systemic: I believe many of the issues that are casually blamed on sexism are actually the result of more nuanced social problems.

For example, a huge reason for the gender wage gap is the lack of women in strategically important subjects: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM.) Governments, universities and businesses have been participating in massive campaigns to attract women into STEM subjects. If you're mathematically-inclined and you have a vagina, they'll do just about anything to keep you happy: money, tuition, awards, internships, jobs.
Sounds pretty f'n sweet, right?
So where the f are they?

Recent studies in mathematical education have tried to figure it out. Hold on to your hat, Vornskr. It turns out that women are vulnerable to the insecurities of their female teachers.
Holy Cow. The solution to women making less money is to be more sexist and stop letting stupid women teach girls to be afraid of math.
Is your mind blown?

MAKE ME A BABY

Ok. It sounds like we are, in fact, largely in agreement. One of the most ridiculous things about modern feminist discourse is its way of talking about "the patriarchy" as if it were some gigantic, systemic conspiracy. This is not the case.

However, all the sexism that goes on at a personal level does add up to real disadvantages. Girls are trained not to be good at math, by being told that they aren't good at math, that it isn't feminine to be good at math, and so on. I'm skeptical that this:



is the only, or even the primary, mechanism that's socializing half our population away from STEM subjects. Could it be playing a part? Sure.

But the bigger problem is with society's insistence on stupid gender roles at large.

Whatevs. I'm going to the kitchen. Anyone want a sandwich?

You're not fooling anyone. You have all the culinary skills of a jug of bleach.

EDIT: Uh...Happy Women's Day?

It better have bacon.

BABY

You know my price for a baby, Tracer. Though I might not "make one" so much as "steal one from someone else" -- alternatively, the price for NOT paying my price, whether you want a baby or not, is your first born...and a sandwich.

guys guys guys. no one cares anymore. its Tuesday now.

Not here it isn't.

Definitely, but how does sexism against women compare to sexism against men? How does it compare to ageism? Or racism? It's impossible to say: a person's prejudices are a lot more complex than any of these words could imply.

The systemic extension of personal sexism is also difficult to evaluate. What you're saying is that it's kind of like the Holocaust, right? The Holocaust was only possible because of a consensus. No single person ever thought they were doing anything really bad - like, during the Nuremberg Trials, one of the guys in charge of Auschwitz thought his job was just keeping the trains running. It's not the individual sexism that matters, it's the sum.

But it doesn't work that way. Sexism runs both ways, and there are more women in positions of authority than ever before. It's gotten to the point where the feminization of academia is a serious issue: it's affecting male enrollment in STEM, and those men clearly aren't being replaced by the extra women. It's difficult to overstate the amount of damage this is doing to the American economy.

You can be skeptical all you want, but people who know a lot more about the subject disagree with you:


B., A. "Math anxiety in female teachers may hinder math achievement in girls." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107.5 (2010): 1809-1810.

"Stupid gender roles." That says it all, doesn't it? People like you used to tell my university-educated mother she was less of a person because she wanted to be a housewife.
It's trivial to argue that our (heteronormative) socially-constructed gender roles descend directly from biological fact (i.e. sexual dimorphism.) I can even argue that they're collectively and individually good; economically and biologically beneficial, which is why they evolved in the first place.

It's much more difficult to prove that these "stupid gender roles" are, in fact, "stupid." Speaking as someone with strong academic and strong personal opinions on the subject, I do not believe you are capable of giving me a proof that I can take seriously.

Choosing to be a housewife is significantly different than being expected to fulfill the role of a housewife. Lots of stereotypes come about from not wholly-absurd thought processes, but it doesn't mean that we should let them decide things for us. And yes, people who made fun of your mother did not know better.

Sounds like Vornskr needs to grow a pair.

The whole contractual drink thing would make me an angry woman.

The VERY first time I went to a bar a gay mexican guy bought me my first drink (a sex on the beach, of all things), before I even got out of my wheelchair and into the bar stool.

He never came over to talk, though. Maybe my reaction wasn't gay enough?

I wasn't aware of women's day until it was women's day. I hope I wasn't supposed to buy flowers. They should really give a guy some ****ing warning about this **** before it's too late.

Why so bitter, Jon'C? Did them wimmin took yer joerb?

You should train yourself to stop responding to text that you have not read.

AND IRON MY SHIRT

I did read your text, though you are correct in that my previous post was more a response to your general tone than to anything specific you said.

I still fail to see how a study illustrating an interesting way in which women are kept down from an early age somehow contradicts feminism. Certainly the lack of male teachers in elementary education is a problem, but that's more due to the general sex abuse hysteria (as well as lingering stereotypes about "women's work") than any sort of feminist plot. However, this particular case would seem to point to the problem being the math anxiety endemic to elementary school teachers. I believe the study also suggested that women who dislike math more than the general population gravitate toward early education; if this cycle can be broken the problem might eventually disappear.

No one believes that there is some massive anti-woman conspiracy, but despite the vast gains in gender equality over the past decades, the little things still do add up and are worth talking about.

If by "more" you mean "exclusively, and irritatingly" you'd be right.

Nobody is contradicting feminism. Third-wave feminism is a marketing movement, and neo/post-feminism mainly deals with the philosophy of gender. Both movements, although loosely-defined, are openly criticized as having no particular social or political objective, and almost nothing to do with feminism other than liberally whining about the patriarchy.

If you are not aware of a difference between classical (first and second-wave feminism) and modern feminism, I propose you have absolutely no business attempting to characterize the "tones" of others.

Care to provide some evidence for this hypothesis?

Have you ever talked to people going into general education these days? Most of them are walking disasters: people who barely make it through college arithmetic, couldn't maintain the continuation average for their liberal arts program and mentally wrestle with Ed Psych (which mainly focuses on when it is and is not appropriate to hug a child.)

The number of men and women going into education roughly reflects the student demographics at most universities: closing on 70%, women. The fact that men land the coveted high school jobs is, I think, the appropriate opposite of the advantages women have in STEM subjects.

And unfortunately, at the end of the day, the only sign that there are little things "adding up" is the fact that women make less money than men do. I'm interested in discussing why. I believe I already mentioned the intellectual failings of people who can't shut up about how a problem exists.

It's actually a plot to make you guys pity us and give us more jobs and more power until eventually we take over the world and move all men underground.

But seriously, Jon`C, just to address your last point, these "little things" aren't really measurable. It's in the attitudes you encounter and other, more subjective things. Women aren't oppressed by any stretch of the imagination, and no one's trying to say we are.

...Actually I'm not entirely sure what your point is, nor am I sure what Vornskr's is and what exactly you guys are debating about besides elementary school teachers.

I will say, though, that I took 3 completely different women's studies classes in college and have never encountered the terms you're throwing out there like first through third wave feminism, though I'll grant that the three classes were pretty specific topics.

I'd ask for a refund.

The term 'women's studies' contributes to the gender divide.

I always found the fact that women take women's studies courses slightly absurd. It's men who spend all their time studying women.

Well it was a women's college, so it was a gen ed requirement

I like boobs.

I found myself laughing at how true this statement is based upon nothing more than my personal conversations & experiences w/ several women in elementary education programs. I can even remember a girl that I was dating dropping out of the program (she had already dropped out of 2-3 music programs at 2-3 different universities) & changing her major to nursing (a far easier program as long as you can make it through anatomy/physiology) because she was having trouble passing her statistics course (I was helping her do her homework & I myself never went further than college algebra).

How would you know?

why thank you, id love a sandwich

If I seen you at a bar, I'd buy you anything you wanted.

I bet that explains the girl I overheard the other day explaining to her friend that gravity was the most powerful force in the universe.

I'd buy Kirby a large dog, just for laughs.

Is Temperamental hitting on me?

And is a large dog a bear/***** thing, or an alcoholic beverage? Do I get to choose between you?

Shutup Kirby

Make me a sammich

As soon as you put out.

You got it all out of order, baby. You gots to earn it.