Feminism and How I don't Care

[Free-Beings]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

[Free-Beings]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

[Bottle]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

If you want to argue that femaleness should be regarded as a handicap, then I will go make myself some popcorn and enjoy the show.

[Free-Beings]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

If you want to argue that femaleness should be regarded as a handicap, then I will go make myself some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Didn't say that now did I? Just giving an example how the same standard shouldn't be applied to everyone.

[Tokos]

If race results in real, significant differences that need to be taken into account, different standards are not wrong. If race results in no such thing, then different standards are not wrong. This is something a child can understand.

Femininity in some situations is a handicap, others masculinity is. This is again not hard to understand and something most children know. Apparently adults need to be educated out of their wits to forget it.

[Treznor]

If race results in real, significant differences that need to be taken into account, different standards are not wrong. If race results in no such thing, then different standards are not wrong. This is something a child can understand.

Femininity in some situations is a handicap, others masculinity is. This is again not hard to understand and something most children know. Apparently adults need to be educated out of their wits to forget it.

So, what situations would you describe femininity a handicap? Firefighting? Combat? Other "traditionally" masculine professions? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Bottle]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

If you want to argue that femaleness should be regarded as a handicap, then I will go make myself some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Didn't say that now did I? Just giving an example how the same standard shouldn't be applied to everyone.

My entire point (if you trace back through the quotes) was that the whole "context" BS is just that...BS. In what "context" would people be okay with arguing that a black man should be paid less than a white man due exclusively to the fact that he is black?

[Bottle]

If race results in real, significant differences that need to be taken into account, different standards are not wrong. If race results in no such thing, then different standards are not wrong. This is something a child can understand.

Femininity in some situations is a handicap, others masculinity is. This is again not hard to understand and something most children know. Apparently adults need to be educated out of their wits to forget it.

Femininity =/= femaleness.

Next?

[Free-Beings]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

If you want to argue that femaleness should be regarded as a handicap, then I will go make myself some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Didn't say that now did I? Just giving an example how the same standard shouldn't be applied to everyone.

My entire point (if you trace back through the quotes) was that the whole "context" BS is just that...BS. In what "context" would people be okay with arguing that a black man should be paid less than a white man due exclusively to the fact that he is black?

And I'm saying that is not the only circumstance where people could be or are held to different standards.

[Tokos]

So, what situations would you describe femininity a handicap? Firefighting? Combat? Other "traditionally" masculine professions? Inquiring minds want to know.

I really shouldn't have to explain this to you. If you can't spot the very obvious differences between men and women, you're a hopeless case, or in denial.

You could always test it by getting upset over something and crying a river in front of your friends, and seeing how they react vs how they'd react if you were distaff Treznor.

That's the central problem with feminism, like abstract religion it is based on what "ideally should be" rather than what is. Facts don't enter into the equation when righteous morals can be involved.

[Bottle]

Different standards are not in themselves wrong; it all depends on context.

Like how it's fine to hold black people to different standards than whites purely because of their race, right?

How about not expecting someone with a physical handicap to perform as well in sports has someone who doesn't, or someone with a mental handicap to do just as well in school as a person with a fully functional brain.

If you want to argue that femaleness should be regarded as a handicap, then I will go make myself some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Didn't say that now did I? Just giving an example how the same standard shouldn't be applied to everyone.

My entire point (if you trace back through the quotes) was that the whole "context" BS is just that...BS. In what "context" would people be okay with arguing that a black man should be paid less than a white man due exclusively to the fact that he is black?

And I'm saying that is not the only circumstance where people could be or are held to different standards.

Erm, okay, as long as you realize that's irrelevant to what we're talking about.

[Bottle]

So, what situations would you describe femininity a handicap? Firefighting? Combat? Other "traditionally" masculine professions? Inquiring minds want to know.

I really shouldn't have to explain this to you. If you can't spot the very obvious differences between men and women, you're a hopeless case, or in denial.

You could always test it by getting upset over something and crying a river in front of your friends, and seeing how they react vs how they'd react if you were distaff Treznor.

How about explaining the shifting of the goal posts, instead?

You claimed that femininity or masculinity can be handicaps, but now you've changed this to talking about "differences between men and women." Which are, of course, completely different subjects.

[Treznor]

So, what situations would you describe femininity a handicap? Firefighting? Combat? Other "traditionally" masculine professions? Inquiring minds want to know.

I really shouldn't have to explain this to you. If you can't spot the very obvious differences between men and women, you're a hopeless case, or in denial.

You could always test it by getting upset over something and crying a river in front of your friends, and seeing how they react vs how they'd react if you were distaff Treznor.

That's the central problem with feminism, like abstract religion it is based on what "ideally should be" rather than what is. Facts don't enter into the equation when righteous morals can be involved.

No, you really do. I understand there are biological difference between men and women. What I don't understand is how those differences justify discrimination in employment, such as when a woman gets paid less for doing the same job as a man, or being excluded from a job that she's worked hard to qualify for. So please, elaborate: where do you envision being a woman a handicap for a job?

[Tokos]

No, you really do. I understand there are biological difference between men and women. What I don't understand is how those differences justify discrimination in employment, such as when a woman gets paid less for doing the same job as a man, or being excluded from a job that she's worked hard to qualify for. So please, elaborate: where do you envision being a woman a handicap for a job?

The pay gap exists for several reasons that cannot be simply ascribed to discrimination. These include women taking lower paid jobs, women working less hours than men, women generally having less business ambition than men on average, pregnancy, and women not being as pushy when it comes to asking for pay rises etc (also a reason you find so many women in call centres).

I don't understand what you mean by being excluded from a job. If you mean the fire brigade and suchlike, then it's really quite obvious.

[Bottle]

So, what situations would you describe femininity a handicap? Firefighting? Combat? Other "traditionally" masculine professions? Inquiring minds want to know.

I really shouldn't have to explain this to you. If you can't spot the very obvious differences between men and women, you're a hopeless case, or in denial.

You could always test it by getting upset over something and crying a river in front of your friends, and seeing how they react vs how they'd react if you were distaff Treznor.

That's the central problem with feminism, like abstract religion it is based on what "ideally should be" rather than what is. Facts don't enter into the equation when righteous morals can be involved.

No, you really do. I understand there are biological difference between men and women. What I don't understand is how those differences justify discrimination in employment, such as when a woman gets paid less for doing the same job as a man, or being excluded from a job that she's worked hard to qualify for. So please, elaborate: where do you envision being a woman a handicap for a job?

Try it from this angle:

Let's take the example of firefighters. To become a firefighter, one must demonstrate a certain set of abilities and skills. If you cannot perform sufficiently, you can't be a firefighter. I don't argue with this; few people do! We want our firefighters to be capable of doing their jobs safely and effectively.

Nobody is arguing that women who cannot function as firefighters should be allowed to be firefighters, just like nobody argues that men who can't pass the tests should be allowed to become firefighters. It's true that many of the tests to become a firefighter might be harder for women due to their smaller average physical size, or harder for men due to their lower pain thresholds, but this doesn't mean much when you're looking at an INDIVIDUAL'S ability to pass the tests. If they pass they pass, and it really doesn't matter if "most" men or "most" women could have passed the test.

So why should one person who passes the test be treated differently than another person who scores just the same, simply because the first person is male and the second is female? Or because the first is white and the second is black? Why does it matter if there are trends in a population, when it comes to evaluating individual performance?

[Treznor]

No, you really do. I understand there are biological difference between men and women. What I don't understand is how those differences justify discrimination in employment, such as when a woman gets paid less for doing the same job as a man, or being excluded from a job that she's worked hard to qualify for. So please, elaborate: where do you envision being a woman a handicap for a job?

The pay gap exists for several reasons that cannot be simply ascribed to discrimination. These include women taking lower paid jobs, women working less hours than men, women generally having less business ambition than men on average, pregnancy, and women not being as pushy when it comes to asking for pay rises etc (also a reason you find so many women in call centres).

I don't understand what you mean by being excluded from a job. If you mean the fire brigade and suchlike, then it's really quite obvious.

There's a small problem with your arguments here: they have nothing to do with reality.

According to General Accountability Office (GAO) Report GAO-04-35, the weekly earnings of full-time working women were about three-fourths of men's during 2001. The report was prepared from a study of the earnings history of over 9,300 Americans for the last 18 years.

Even accounting for factors such as occupation, industry, race, marital status and job tenure, reports the GAO, working women today earn an average of 80 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts. This pay gap has persisted for the past two decades, remaining relatively consistent from 1983-2000.

In attempting to explain the discrepancies in pay between men and women, the GAO concluded:

Women in the workforce are also less likely to work a full-time schedule and are more likely to leave the labor force for longer periods of time than men, further suppressing women's wages. These differing work patterns lead to an even larger earnings gap between men and women - suggesting that working women are penalized for their dual roles as wage earners and those who disproportionately care for home and family.

Men with children appear to get an earnings boost, whereas women lose earnings. Men with children earn about 2% more on average than men without children, according to the GAO findings, whereas women with children earn about 2.5% less than women without children.

Women have fewer years of work experience.

"The world today is vastly different than it was in 1983, but sadly, one thing that has remained the same is the pay gap between men and women," said U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-New York, 14th). "After accounting for so many external factors, it seems that still, at the root of it all, men get an inherent annual bonus just for being men. If this continues, the only guarantees in life will be death, taxes and the glass ceiling. We can't let that happen."

Furthermore, I've already linked you to examples of women successfully pursuing careers as firefighters and combat soldiers, two classically "masculine" roles. So we're right back where we started, where women are discriminated against because they're women rather than their qualifications.

[Tokos]

Physique-wise, the differences between men are women are a great deal more profound than average strength or endurance, so the number of women capable may be very much smaller than would be expected.

The other major reason I can think of is a matter of team, and cameraderie, between the firemen. This is not something to be sniffed at as just a matter of old dinosaurs afraid of women excelling at what they do; it's a real phenomenon that that the factor of sexual competition affects how a team, or group of people, work. That is not to say that women can't be in the fire brigade; but it's understandable how the men in it are cautious of such a drastic change. Not knowing anyone in the fire brigade I'm holding no position as to whether it is possible or impossible for women to cope in the fire brigade.

[Callisdrun]

Physique-wise, the differences between men are women are a great deal more profound than average strength or endurance, so the number of women capable may be very much smaller than would be expected.

The other major reason I can think of is a matter of team, and cameraderie, between the firemen. This is not something to be sniffed at as just a matter of old dinosaurs afraid of women excelling at what they do; it's a real phenomenon that that the factor of sexual competition affects how a team, or group of people, work. That is not to say that women can't be in the fire brigade; but it's understandable how the men in it are cautious of such a drastic change. Not knowing anyone in the fire brigade I'm holding no position as to whether it is possible or impossible for women to cope in the fire brigade.

Physique-wise, the differences between big people and small people are a great deal more profound than average strength or endurance.

You're really struggling here. Women are smaller on average. We get that. However, if they can pass the tests necessary to become firefighters, there's no reason not to.

As for your second point, that will change the more women join. Outdated attitudes take longer to change than outdated laws and rules.

[Bottle]

Physique-wise, the differences between men are women are a great deal more profound than average strength or endurance, so the number of women capable may be very much smaller than would be expected.

How does this have any relevance to an individual woman who passes all the required tests?

There are many men who can't pass the exams to become a firefighter. So what?

Most men are too short to play professional basketball...does that somehow mean that LeBron James shouldn't be playing basketball because "men in general" are too short to play professional basketball?

The other major reason I can think of is a matter of team, and cameraderie, between the firemen. This is not something to be sniffed at as just a matter of old dinosaurs afraid of women excelling at what they do; it's a real phenomenon that that the factor of sexual competition affects how a team, or group of people, work. That is not to say that women can't be in the fire brigade; but it's understandable how the men in it are cautious of such a drastic change. Not knowing anyone in the fire brigade I'm holding no position as to whether it is possible or impossible for women to cope in the fire brigade.

Funny, those are precisely the same arguments that were used by people who opposed racial integration. And by "funny," I mean "pathetic."

[Ifreann]

Physique-wise, the differences between men are women are a great deal more profound than average strength or endurance, so the number of women capable may be very much smaller than would be expected.

The other major reason I can think of is a matter of team, and cameraderie, between the firemen. This is not something to be sniffed at as just a matter of old dinosaurs afraid of women excelling at what they do; it's a real phenomenon that that the factor of sexual competition affects how a team, or group of people, work. That is not to say that women can't be in the fire brigade; but it's understandable how the men in it are cautious of such a drastic change. Not knowing anyone in the fire brigade I'm holding no position as to whether it is possible or impossible for women to cope in the fire brigade.

If male firefighters can't deal with working with a woman then I rather think it's them who should be looking for a new job, not the woman who just qualified.

[Chumblywumbly]

There are many men who can't pass the exams to become a firefighter. So what?

I personally apologise to the males of this species for restricting them from being firefighters.

[Bottle]

There are many men who can't pass the exams to become a firefighter. So what?

I personally apologise to the males of this species for restricting them from being firefighters.

It's funny because it's true, at least for most minority groups.

http://xkcd.com/385/

This happens to me in videogames a lot. If a guy plays badly, everyone says "Dude, you suck." If I play badly, there will always be at least one person who says, "Dude, girls suck at videogames." My poor performance at something DOES get used to hold back other girls! If I fail at something, it's not because I just so happen to have failed, it's because females as a group are failures.

[Chumblywumbly]

...This happens to me in videogames a lot. If a guy plays badly, everyone says "Dude, you suck." If I play badly, there will always be at least one person who says, "Dude, girls suck at videogames."

Or the reverse, "Dude! You should have seen Jenny play SoulCalibur, she was amazing!!" (i.e., Jenny managed to beat one boy.)

The longer I live, the more I realise just how much of a bubble I live in being a middle-class WASP.

[Central Slavia]

...This happens to me in videogames a lot. If a guy plays badly, everyone says "Dude, you suck." If I play badly, there will always be at least one person who says, "Dude, girls suck at videogames."

Or the reverse, "Dude! You should have seen Jenny play SoulCalibur, she was amazing!!" (i.e., Jenny managed to beat one boy.)

The longer I live, the more I realise just how much of a bubble I live in being a middle-class WASP.

Not to mention when a man fails at something, he is seen as disgrace to men. I just love the whiny feminists who say A but hold back the B

[Flammable Ice]

No way could I read a book on Feminism. Or any ideology really - the sensible part can usually be summed up in one or two sentences (e.g. "men and women should have equal rights") and anything more is going to be crap.