Sexsim: have the tables actually turned?

[Vault101]

OP: `I know who I will ask about gender inequality! Gamers! Their commitment to gender equality is legendary!` /facepalm.
No, men still dont have it harder, despite `affirmative action``, despite all the `feminazis` trying to spoil their fun.

I honestly dont know why people ask questions like this to a community known for its `delicate` approach to gender politics.

actually to be honest Im quite ok with the reactions, trust me thease assholes on certain blogs I somtimes go are ALWAYS whining about how all women are evil, (I hsve a theory however that its the same set of people and not a true representation of most peoeples attitudes..I hope)

anyway thourght Id get the escapists veiw and its all nicly discussed and thourght out

 

[loop78]

all im saying is i dotn think the tables have turned quite yet but noone cares if a female is saying women are better then men but if you say a man is better then a women...

 

[tyriless]

"

Name one slightly significant thing invented by a woman. Go on, I'll wait.

I'm not sure what it exactly is, but I think testosterone is the big driver here.

I'll give you two and they are medical themed:

Marie Curie
Discovered radium and furthered x-ray technology.


Dianne Croteau
Invented the CPR mannequin.

 

[Daddy Go Bot]

While she did make advances in her field (Like plenty of women are doing), she didn't "invent" anything per se. Like I said before, women are good at adapting to the world men create.

So no, I'm not contradicting myself if that's what you're implying.

Actually, you are. You claim that women don't have the ability to innovate, but instead adapt to creations and machinations of men. Therefore men explicitly control the ideas and "world" as it is, by setting the rules and mechanics of it. Women cannot change the rules, therefore they can never be superior to men: no matter how good women are at adapting, men can always undo or remake it.

Every one of your other arguments are supposedly to prove feminine superiority and advantage, but this, your own argument, disallows that possibility. Therefore you have contradicted yourself.

Also: You don't consider Radiology, an entire school of science, a significant invention?

I've never stated that women do not posses the ability to innovate, it's just that their "inventions" pale in comparison to that of men's to the point where they're not even worth mentioning.

But if it's true that radiology was something created by women then color me impressed.

Do you not consider the fact that men have like a few thousand years on us because we weren't ALLOWED to invent anything? Just a thought.

*sigh*......

You wouldn't believe how many times I've gone over this with people (Not just here of course). What you bring up is a common argument by feminists, but once you bring up the fact that the greatest inventors throughout human history have had little to no formal education, there's no way to really respond to that.

And what if I was to bring up the fact that all technological advances are still carried out by men and men only in our equal society? Sorry cupcake, but the female oppression bullshit card holds no water here.

I'll give you two and they are medical themed:

Marie Curie
Discovered radium and furthered x-ray technology.


Dianne Croteau
Invented the CPR mannequin.

I actually gave a shout-out to Marie Curie in one of my earlier posts and she did indeed make some great progress in chemistry, so kudos to her. Although I personally cannot argue the significance of radium, she certainly deserves some credit.

The CPR mannequin?......L..O..L.

 

[Dark Knifer]

If a woman ever had abuse of any kind by a spouse, I would understand chopping his junk off.

I'd assume you'd be ok if a man ever had abuse of any kind then you would understand him cutting her uterus out?

OT: As I have posted on this thread that just refuses to go away, it's very much depending where you look at. It's not all sexism towards one gender or another, it comes from both sides.

 

[Phasmal]

Sorry cupcake

Of course, men are so hard-done by.
Dont fucking talk down to me.

EDIT: Ok that may have been a harsh reaction to start with, but seriously? Are you going to talk to me like I'm a little girl cause I brought up a point you disagree with? Did you do that to the guys disagreeing with you.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

Everyone is still equally discriminating against everyone alse it's just harder to notice.

 

[Daddy Go Bot]

Sorry cupcake

Of course, men are so hard-done by.
Dont fucking talk down to me.

EDIT: Ok that may have been a harsh reaction to start with, but seriously? Are you going to talk to me like I'm a little girl cause I brought up a point you disagree with? Did you do that to the guys disagreeing with you.

That's really cute and all, but how actually refuting my arguments instead? There's no need to make this personal.

 

[tyriless]

No, I had my fill of propaganda talking to my right-wing friend at work

 

[Crusader1089]

In the UK two women die every week from domestic abuse.


So no. The tables have not turned.

 

[2xDouble]

While she did make advances in her field (Like plenty of women are doing), she didn't "invent" anything per se. Like I said before, women are good at adapting to the world men create.

So no, I'm not contradicting myself if that's what you're implying.

Actually, you are. You claim that women don't have the ability to innovate, but instead adapt to creations and machinations of men. Therefore men explicitly control the ideas and "world" as it is, by setting the rules and mechanics of it. Women cannot change the rules, therefore they can never be superior to men: no matter how good women are at adapting, men can always undo or remake it.

Every one of your other arguments are supposedly to prove feminine superiority and advantage, but this, your own argument, disallows that possibility. Therefore you have contradicted yourself.

Also: You don't consider Radiology, an entire school of science, a significant invention?

I've never stated that women do not posses the ability to innovate, it's just that their "inventions" pale in comparison to that of men's to the point where they're not even worth mentioning.

But if it's true that radiology was something created by women then color me impressed.

You're going to make me quote you back to you again, aren't you? Very well:

While she did make advances in her field (Like plenty of women are doing), she didn't "invent" anything per se. Like I said before, women are good at adapting to the world men create.

The world men create. Men are the creators of the world. Women do not create the world, they adapt to it. They are good at adapting, so why don't they create the world? they must lack the ability. You said it.

And again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie

Credit is given where it's due. Always has been.

From that very article:

Her achievements include a theory of radioactivity (a term that she coined), techniques for isolating radioactive isotopes, and the discovery of two elements, polonium and radium. Under her direction, the world's first studies were conducted into the treatment of neoplasms, using radioactive isotopes.

According to this evidence, Marie Curie created Radiology, the study of radioactivity.

 

[Vault101]

Misogyny is still alive and well, at least in the United States, and you don't have to look at this internet forum to prove that. Our corporate, political, and social leaders overwhelmingly have a Y chromosome so this culture is predominantly a patriarchy. This wouldn't be bad in itself except watch when a woman runs for political office and listen to what is said about her. She's a harpy, a shrew, a *****, a ball buster: these are all reserved for any woman that wants to be taken seriously by the public or wants to sacrifice a social life for an actual career.
I dig feminism. It's not some lesbo boogey-*****, coming to cut your balls off. It's about equal rights, equal pay, and equal respect for women. Nothing is wrong with that.

Feminism has proven to be nothing but poison for western civilization.

I highly recommend that you watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkVWz0uXiEA

is that from the same persen/group/whatever that did the school video?

FIRST of all feminism has changed split..or whatever you want to call it, at its heart it was always about "hey we arnt inferior to men!" not "we are BETTER than men!" but obviously like any movement time went it got taken to an extreme,

without feminism (no not crazy extreme feminism even though I shouldnt have to fucking say that) women would still be expected to aspire to nothing else in life other than making her man happy and popping out kids

now obviously its now a very grey issue, from the comments here I gues BOTH sides have issues to deal with, it would be stupid to say only one had the real problems

and yeah..there are problems stemming from pandering to girls...though (somwhat biased) videos like this and arguments from the otherside like to point out all the issues...but never seem to have any answers

I mean seriously whats the solution? we create seperate societies for men and women?

 

[HHammond]

No, we aren't. Women still have to deal with shit that men don't have to, and you can't say the same about the opposite. I have no idea why everyone on the internet is so against feminism.

This. This is why. This believe that women are so much worst off and that men just have no idea how easy they have it. I'm sorry, but there are PLENTY of things woman don't have to deal with that men do. Yes, the issues women face everyday are much more apparent because it seems that society has build this idea that men shouldn't show their feelings or their worries but it's okay for women to. The stuff men deal with is just not so obvious. Yes, you have a right to voice your anger and frustration and yes, women deserve MUCH more respect then they get but to brush it off with such a sweeping statement is just ridiculous.

However, men have a lot to make up for. For thousands of years we've oppressed woman and now we're starting to see what shitheads we are and all the things woman have to offer. Have the tables turned? No, I wouldn't say so. Women still have a lot of things to fight for and they should fight. I'd class myself as a femenist. I don't like the way the media portray women and the fact that so many people will lie down and accept that portrayal (although I am mainly focusing on girls in their late teens and twenties).

So, No. The tables have not turned. Sure, equality has not been gained yet and women still have a lot to fight for but this idea that men have it worse is just silly. Look how male dominated are society still is. Yes, it's becoming less so but it's still extremely difficult for a women to make it compared to a man.

 

[Daddy Go Bot]

Really, 2xDouble...Really?

Would it make you happy if I said there will always be an exception to the rule? That much is obvious, but generally, men are indeed the ones who propel the world forward.

 

[Thaluikhain]

What I do find interesting is the oft-asserted claim that "women are paid less than men for the equivalent work". Putting aside the arguments over salary vs wage (data can be produced to support both 'sides' of the argument), I simply don't find this plausible, since it relies upon the implication that capitalist greed is overwhelmed by patriarchal hegemony. Consider: apparently we live in a male-dominated capitalist society. Now, if women are indeed as capable as man in any given job, then what we have is a group of workers who can produce equivalent output at a lower price. Yet I'm supposed to believe that the male capitalists employing labour are so sexist that they would forgo an opportunity to increase their profit?

Well, I don't. The logical conclusion, therefore, is that workplaces should be largely occupied by female workers. Equivalent output, reduced input prices. Yet that's not the case, so I see only three possible conclusions.

1) Endemic sexism really is stronger than the profit motive.
2) Women are not, in terms of the more common occupations within society, as capable as men.
3) Women are not actually underpaid on average.

The first is laughable. The second cannot really be argued outside of specific examples (obviously there are roles where men and women excel versus each other, but in general?). So...

Why laughable? That sort of thing is hardly uncommon in other areas.

Putting aside the idea of women receiving less money for now, you'd agree that it's in the interest of the business/whomever to have the most qualified person for the position, right?

And yet, industry/politics/military of the Western world tends to be dominated by heterosexual white men. You could say they are the majority, but they sre still over-represented.

Or, to take a more concrete example, the US military has only recently allowed openly gay personnel to serve within its ranks. Is this because up until recently, gay people weren't good enough for the military? That they still aren't, and allowing them in is a mistake? Or was there a bias against them that had nothing to do with their actual ability.

Yes, it'd make rational sense for businesses to ignore gender, but prejudice isn't based on rationality. Few people are going to consciously reject a woman on the basis of her gender, they are going to assume that a woman isn't as good as a man (in some sense) and react accordingly.

Sorry cupcake

Of course, men are so hard-done by.
Dont fucking talk down to me.

EDIT: Ok that may have been a harsh reaction to start with, but seriously? Are you going to talk to me like I'm a little girl cause I brought up a point you disagree with? Did you do that to the guys disagreeing with you.

That's really cute and all, but how actually refuting my arguments instead? There's no need to make this personal.

Um, just possibly it's the person who has resorted to sexist language to patronise the other who is making it personal.

EDIT: Argh, fucked up the quote order.

 

[Phasmal]

Sorry cupcake

Of course, men are so hard-done by.
Dont fucking talk down to me.

EDIT: Ok that may have been a harsh reaction to start with, but seriously? Are you going to talk to me like I'm a little girl cause I brought up a point you disagree with? Did you do that to the guys disagreeing with you.

That's really cute and all, but how actually refuting my arguments instead? There's no need to make this personal.

First of all, you made this personal by (repeatedly) talking down to me.
Also, women not being able to have their ideas taken seriously was less about being uneducated and more about being married off and knocked up and under their husbands authority for their lives?
Like I said, gamers have such wonderful attitudes towards women.

In the UK two women die every week from domestic abuse.


So no. The tables have not turned.

Also this.

 

[GryffinDarkBreed]

No, we aren't. Women still have to deal with shit that men don't have to, and you can't say the same about the opposite. I have no idea why everyone on the internet is so against feminism.

Because of feminazis. I know the movement, as a whole, demands equality, but them dumbshits are looking for supremacy.

Anyway, getting a job as an engineer (especially electrical engineering) is much easier as a woman. This is an unfortunate problem that we currently face.

Being the lazy, never-had-a-summer-job bastard that I am, I don't know much about affirmative action and all that, but is it really worse than having a worse biological setup (periods, pregnancy...), more prone to receiving violence (rape, spousal abuse...), and several other things I could mention, but am too lazy to elaborate on(lower income, larger share of housework, media problems, more strict social standards)?

Wait a second, back that train up.
Worse biological setup? What about testicular and prostate problems, they kill a fair amount of men each year. Also what about guys having that lovely extra problem of being prone to certain types of hernias due to the male set up?
More prone to violence? Last I checked in domestic cases women actually hit more often, it just happens that when guys hit they do more damage.
Lower income, a bit debatable, aren't women now the majority in a lot of high paying professions such as doctors, lawyers and whatnot?
Media problems? Please elaborate, because last I checked women in the media get away with a lot of crap that guys don't. An old guy calls some women nappy headed and a lynch mob goes after him. A bunch of women make fun of and demean a guy who gets his penis cut off by a spouse and its hilarious and "you go girl". If a guy did the same, he would be out of a job permanently in any media, but for women hey its cool because its empowering to them.

Breast cancer? And I doubt hernias are worse than pregnancy.
The second... I'd ask for sources but I didn't use any either (aside from Wikipedia). So I guess that's a draw?
Again, we're both talking out our asses.
I meant that women are always shown as highly sexualized in pretty much everything. You could say the same for men, but I don't think women are as ok about all their role models shown with huge boobs as men are with theirs with muscles (also, I've heard that overmuscled guys aren't that attractive to women, and that girls are attracted to asses anyways).
Special note on Don Imus: Agree that that was stupid. I think the thing was that he had said worse and "nappy headed hoes" was the straw that broke the camels back. Also, that may have been about racism as much as sexism.

A pregnancy doesn't destroy you for life. A Hernia will. A Pregnancy doesn't increase your odds exponentially for having another pregnancy. A Hernia does. If you have a hernia, you will have another, in the same place, it's only a matter of time. And that Hernia will increase the odds even more.

 

[tyriless]

Actually, you are. You claim that women don't have the ability to innovate, but instead adapt to creations and machinations of men. Therefore men explicitly control the ideas and "world" as it is, by setting the rules and mechanics of it. Women cannot change the rules, therefore they can never be superior to men: no matter how good women are at adapting, men can always undo or remake it.

Every one of your other arguments are supposedly to prove feminine superiority and advantage, but this, your own argument, disallows that possibility. Therefore you have contradicted yourself.

Also: You don't consider Radiology, an entire school of science, a significant invention?

The CPR mannequin?......L..O..L.

Yeah, you won't be laughing when you go into cardiac arrest. Got any idea how much force is needed to compress a human being's chest to ensure that the heart pumps oxygen into the brain or how hard you must push air into a person's lung. I do. That's crap takes practice to do right. Too hard and you break ribs and force air into the stomach, too soft and you got a guaranteed corpse. CPR mannequin is a simple invention, but before it came about there was nothing designed to mimic a thorax. As a life-saving teaching tool it was needed and thus significant.

Since its inception it has saved countless lives. Simple, ingeniously clever, and made by a woman.

 

[Daddy Go Bot]

Um, just possibly it's the person who has resorted to sexist language to patronise the other who is making it personal.
Why laughable? That sort of thing is hardly uncommon in other areas.

Putting aside the idea of women receiving less money for now, you'd agree that it's in the interest of the business/whomever to have the most qualified person for the position, right?

And yet, industry/politics/military of the Western world tends to be dominated by heterosexual white men. You could say they are the majority, but they sre still over-represented.

Or, to take a more concrete example, the US military has only recently allowed openly gay personnel to serve within its ranks. Is this because up until recently, gay people weren't good enough for the military? That they still aren't, and allowing them in is a mistake? Or was there a bias against them that had nothing to do with their actual ability.

Yes, it'd make rational sense for businesses to ignore gender, but prejudice isn't based on rationality. Few people are going to consciously reject a woman on the basis of her gender, they are going to assume that a woman isn't as good as a man (in some sense) and react accordingly.

"Putting aside the idea of women receiving less money for now, you'd agree that it's in the interest of the business/whomever to have the most qualified person for the position, right?"

Yes.... to a certain degree.

"Or, to take a more concrete example, the US military has only recently allowed openly gay personnel to serve within its ranks. Is this because up until recently, gay people weren't good enough for the military? That they still aren't, and allowing them in is a mistake? Or was there a bias against them that had nothing to do with their actual ability."

While I personally do not have much of an opinion in regards to DADT, I think it was for gays very own protection. Really, I never actually cared about it... or for homosexuals in general.

In regards to women in the workplace, I really do not give a shit about whether or not people find this opinion misogynistic, but if I was given the choice, I'd only hire males for my businesses, as women are financial timebombs. Men generally also do more hours than women.

 

[Harlief]

I wouldn't say the tables have turned by any stretch of the imagination, nor should they. Feminism has made huge changes in evening the scores but now it's time for egalitarianism and fine-tuning.