Gender Theory

[ultrachicken]

Of course a number of my points are over simplified but you're thinking outside the box is differing opinions and scenarios, your point are cliché and tired, more wives' tales than fact.

Well, excuse me, but I don't feel like pouring in tons of time to write an essay on the internet. And I wasn't keeping track of the number of stereotypes for each gender because I was just trying to start the conversation.
In short, take a chill pill.

This is a forum, the whole point is discussion. Dismissing opinions because you think they are too long does not a valid argument make.

I was not dismissing your opinion, in fact I read your reply thoroughly. My previous comment was by no means meant to dismiss your argument. What I was explaining is that I was just starting the conversation, not dominating it. However, I'll take the time to answer you:

Aggression does affect how much money you make, not your power. Negotiating your pay has to do with how aggressive you are. You get offered a paycheck, and depending on how aggressive you are, you will try for more money or accept the amount you're given. The US census bureau showed women earned 77 cents to a man's dollar on average. Not a huge margin, but I my statement remains correct. Also, you're likely not to know about that issue unless you're a woman it's unlikely that you would even know about difficulties related to pay, unless you're workplace has a habit of workers meeting with the employer in front of you,

I couldn't help but notice that you only mentioned male inequalities... are you bitter that I didn't give an equal amount of woman and man inequalities?

What cancers are you thinking of? Prostate cancer? The reason that doesn't get media attention is because it's not as deadly as, say, breast cancer. Please list some cancers that only affect men that you're thinking of.

How are my statements wives' tales? How are they naive? You gave no reasoning except for discrediting my statements.

 

[benoitowns]

Unfortunately the society we live in is retarded and very prejudice about stuff including gender. people cant seem to understand the stereotypes they place on one another, and not only that but then they try to follow that standard placed on them and try to assert they are in the norm, conforming in a way that is derogatory to others. For example, think of all the time people mention homosexuality this includes when people say, "Thats so gay" or "Did you see his boots, 'cause thats what I was looking at!"
Edit: Also, what really annoys me is the feminists who assert the sexual nature of things, and call it sexist to not say his or her in every single example when a person is referring to something in the third person. It is so god damn annoying.

 

[effilctar]

But if the guy deserves it, I see nothing wrong with it.

The question is, do you believe a woman deserves the same treatment i.e. a kick in the crotch if they "deserve it"?

If you can honestly answer yes: kudos, you are a mature woman.

 

[Uberjoe19]

I say we all need to just relax. To quote my favorite reference book:

Don't Panic!

Also, various webcomics, anime, and manga love playing around with gender roles.

Spoiler: Here's just a few examples.

Exiern [http://exiern.com]
Misfile [http://misfile.com]
Kampfer
Kashimashi
For more examples, see Gender Bender [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GenderBender]
For examples of the supporting trope, see Attractive Bent Gender [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AttractiveBentGender]

 

[effilctar]

It's less acceptable for women to be aggressive (this results in the average woman receiving a lower wage than the average man)

If you're going to make generalisations or assumptions, it is good etiquette to provide a source leading to said assumption. Provided with no source, I have no choice but to call bullshit on this statement. You cannot just make an assumption and, in lieu of source, attempt to defend your argument by making random citations which are, for all we know, bullshit.

Either learn to source your assumptions properly or prepare to admit defeat when people tear apart your apparent mouth-ejaculant.

 

[TransMando]

It's because there is a double standard between men and women.

What no one seems to understand is that there really is no such thing as a 'man' or a 'woman' and that each of us is a blending of both. The reason we are a 'man' or a 'woman' is because we are more heavily on one end of the scale in terms of this blending.

I could go on this forever, but to conclude quickly what you should have probably said was the 'theory of the sexes'because Gender isn't the category this kind of stuff falls under.

 

[Uberjoe19]

I may catch some (read: a lot) of flak for this, but in my opinion, as long as someone acts intelligently, I will treat them as an equal. I do no take kindly to people who do stupid thing when they should know better.

Also, I say women are already equal to men, only equal in different ways.
Yeah, I know this may remind one of the classic line from Animal Farm (paraphrased to fit the topic at hand).

All people are created equal, but some are more equal than others.

And so...
I forgot where I was going with this post.

 

[ultrachicken]

It's less acceptable for women to be aggressive (this results in the average woman receiving a lower wage than the average man)

If you're going to make generalisations or assumptions, it is good etiquette to provide a source leading to said assumption. Provided with no source, I have no choice but to call bullshit on this statement. You cannot just make an assumption and, in lieu of source, attempt to defend your argument by making random citations which are, for all we know, bullshit.

Either learn to source your assumptions properly or prepare to admit defeat when people tear apart your apparent mouth-ejaculant.

Swearing will make your argument more effective /sarcasm
And what do you mean random citations? If you had the will to spend twenty seconds on google you could find what I was referring to, but I suppose a link is necessary.
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/equalpayact1.html
slightly older link: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/censusandstatistics/a/paygapgrows.htm

 

[effilctar]

Le Snip

From your first source

...Equal Pay Act(effective June 11, 1964)... illegal to pay women lower rates for the same job strictly on the basis of their sex.

Now there's your original post which you later explained to mean that women are paid less because of lack of determination; which in itself is a generalisation, which in turn leads to you basically making the statement "Women are paid less than men because they are women"; which can't be correct as it is in direct conflict with the Equal Pay Act which has been in effect for nigh 44 years now.


As for your second source: if you read through it thoroughly, you may notice that the author is keen on publishing figures without taking into consideration WHY these figure are as they are. Drawing attention to the final paragraph in which Longley claims the poverty rate of female headed household to have increased by 28% in 2003, why is this? Was there a divorce peak in 2003, leading to more single parents with a lower income; or perhaps some high mortality rate among men that year, leading to more widowed mothers? The fact is that the author provides neither source or reason to these numbers. The author may have been a member of the party opposing the party in power at the time, in which case this article is a good example of a straw-man argument in which the author basically nitpicks at the flaws in an attempt to weaken the oppositions defences.

 

[ultrachicken]

Le Snip

From your first source

...Equal Pay Act(effective June 11, 1964)... illegal to pay women lower rates for the same job strictly on the basis of their sex.

Now there's your original post which you later explained to mean that women are paid less because of lack of determination; which in itself is a generalisation, which in turn leads to you basically making the statement "Women are paid less than men because they are women"; which can't be correct as it is in direct conflict with the Equal Pay Act which has been in effect for nigh 44 years now.


As for your second source: if you read through it thoroughly, you may notice that the author is keen on publishing figures without taking into consideration WHY these figure are as they are. Drawing attention to the final paragraph in which Longley claims the poverty rate of female headed household to have increased by 28% in 2003, why is this? Was there a divorce peak in 2003, leading to more single parents with a lower income; or perhaps some high mortality rate among men that year, leading to more widowed mothers? The fact is that the author provides neither source or reason to these numbers. The author may have been a member of the party opposing the party in power at the time, in which case this article is a good example of a straw-man argument in which the author basically nitpicks at the flaws in an attempt to weaken the oppositions defences.

Good job, sir.
However, let me explain why I came to the conclusion that women are paid less because of determination: I learned that in school, not off the internet. I can't get my source because it is not on the internet. I attempted, and failed, apparently.
Also, I appreciate the lack of blatant swearing.

 

[Deadpewl]

I've got a question: Why is it that a woman can wear trousers & no-one so much as bats an eyelid, yet a man who wears a dress is "a pervert"?

Kilts. I win.

 

[Amberella]

But if the guy deserves it, I see nothing wrong with it.

The question is, do you believe a woman deserves the same treatment i.e. a kick in the crotch if they "deserve it"?

If you can honestly answer yes: kudos, you are a mature woman.

Sure, why not. I was kicked there before. -.- And it didn't feel nice. Although it was an accident, but either way, I know it doesn't feel nice for either sex to be kicked there. And only must be used if they "really" deserve it! I made a post after that one about when I had to use it. It was merely for self defense.

Now if a guy and girl are arguing or whatever and the guy says something that the girl thinks he needs kicked there for, is wrong. -.- I do not support any of the sort. I happen to have a friend who kicked her boyfriend there and made him bleed and thought it was funny. Their not together anymore though, which I think is a good thing, because she's the type to get physical when arguing. Barely speak to her anymore too because of it. He was too nice for his own good though, the kind of boy who usually gets taken advantage of from girls because of it. I don't do that kind of stuff though. I'm a whole different breed of female. xD Haha.

Well I was starting to ramble now, so I shall stop now. xD Toodles.

 

[bassdrum]

As terrible as this may seem, it's actually for the same reason that women who get around are sluts and men who get around are enviable: if all women were easy, men wouldn't be as impressive for getting into several different pairs of pants. It's a horrific double standard, but it does make sense in a ridiculously unfair and sexist way.

 

[Crowghast]

Wear a bathrobe. It's about as close to a dress that a male can get without passers-by complaining, throwing insulting, or perhaps finding a bucket of rocks and going off to "stone the heathen sodomite". Not only is the bathrobe acceptable, you can go pretty much anywhere you want with it.

Go ahead. Try it, fellas. Put on a bathrobe and just walk around town completely normal like. I assure you NO-ONE will care.

They probably do, on the inside, but modern human psychology prevents them from responding.

 

[beddo]

Of course a number of my points are over simplified but you're thinking outside the box is differing opinions and scenarios, your point are cliché and tired, more wives' tales than fact.

Well, excuse me, but I don't feel like pouring in tons of time to write an essay on the internet. And I wasn't keeping track of the number of stereotypes for each gender because I was just trying to start the conversation.
In short, take a chill pill.

This is a forum, the whole point is discussion. Dismissing opinions because you think they are too long does not a valid argument make.

I was not dismissing your opinion, in fact I read your reply thoroughly. My previous comment was by no means meant to dismiss your argument. What I was explaining is that I was just starting the conversation, not dominating it. However, I'll take the time to answer you:

Aggression does affect how much money you make, not your power. Negotiating your pay has to do with how aggressive you are. You get offered a paycheck, and depending on how aggressive you are, you will try for more money or accept the amount you're given. The US census bureau showed women earned 77 cents to a man's dollar on average. Not a huge margin, but I my statement remains correct. Also, you're likely not to know about that issue unless you're a woman it's unlikely that you would even know about difficulties related to pay, unless you're workplace has a habit of workers meeting with the employer in front of you,

I couldn't help but notice that you only mentioned male inequalities... are you bitter that I didn't give an equal amount of woman and man inequalities?

What cancers are you thinking of? Prostate cancer? The reason that doesn't get media attention is because it's not as deadly as, say, breast cancer. Please list some cancers that only affect men that you're thinking of.

How are my statements wives' tales? How are they naive? You gave no reasoning except for discrediting my statements.

Negotiation of a paycheck is not down to aggression, it's reliant on so many factors, most notably, job performance. Yes an aggressive person may be more willing to ask for a raise but that can also be a negative, appearing as though they are only interested in money and arrogant about their competency levels.

It is true that man earn more than women on average but the issue is down to so many social, cultural and economic factors that you can't just [ut it down to levels of agression. Splitting things into men and women is a difficult thing to justify because it ignores comparison between age, race, creed, sexuality and class.

The reason I listed a number of inequalities men face is to show how, when talking about gender inequalities, people tend to only focus on the hardships of women. This was clearly shown by the focus of your post.

It would be distasteful to get into an argument about which cancer is worse, all cancer is terrible. My point is that cancers that affect women tend to get more media focus than those that affect men. Bear in mind that breast cancer also affects men yet this is rarely commented upon and that of cancers that affect both genders, men are 60% more likely to develop them and 70% more likely to die from them.

My overall point is that the OP seems to ignore that gender inequality works both ways.

 

[ultrachicken]

Negotiation of a paycheck is not down to aggression, it's reliant on so many factors, most notably, job performance. Yes an aggressive person may be more willing to ask for a raise but that can also be a negative, appearing as though they are only interested in money and arrogant about their competency levels.

It is true that man earn more than women on average but the issue is down to so many social, cultural and economic factors that you can't just [ut it down to levels of agression. Splitting things into men and women is a difficult thing to justify because it ignores comparison between age, race, creed, sexuality and class.

The reason I listed a number of inequalities men face is to show how, when talking about gender inequalities, people tend to only focus on the hardships of women. This was clearly shown by the focus of your post.

It would be distasteful to get into an argument about which cancer is worse, all cancer is terrible. My point is that cancers that affect women tend to get more media focus than those that affect men. Bear in mind that breast cancer also affects men yet this is rarely commented upon and that of cancers that affect both genders, men are 60% more likely to develop them and 70% more likely to die from them.

My overall point is that the OP seems to ignore that gender inequality works both ways.

I believe I explained already that I wasn't keeping track of how many inequalities I listed for each gender, I simply listed what first came to mind. If I was ignoring that gender inequality works both ways I would have called this thread something like "oppression against women." The fact that you ignored what I've said previously is quite annoying.

If you looked one or two posts above you, you would see that I already discovered that my claim about inequal pay is not true. However, the "aggression is less acceptable in women" still remains true, at least around where I live.

A source for your cancer statistics and then I will agree with you.