the story of feminism, as told by women

[chenGOD]

eugene - well considering "the sociological imagination" is a widely-used book in the field...

 

anyways take his example of unemployment - when 1 out of 100,000 is unemployed, that is a personal trouble. When 15 million are unemployed out of 50 million employable people, it is a public issue.

 

So is Keanu giving up his seat a personal trouble (that is, only keanu is doing it), or is it a public issue (many people are doing it) and if it is the latter what does it say about changes in society. If it is the former, what does it say about men's normative roles in society?

[Guest dese manz hatin]

Then it's clearly a public issue, as it is part of a greater narrative (sorry, lack of better word) in which women are presented and perceived as weaker. Thus you wouldn't blame the single person but rather his or her socialization.

 

I don't even get why some are hating on the guy. For fucks sake he's giving his seat to some person, how do you know he wouldn't have done the same thing for a man.

[chenGOD]

Ah but times are changing! Women are deemed to be more equal!

(for the record I think he was just being nice - I tend to not give up my seat to people around the same age as me, but if they're older then definitely yes).

[Guest dese manz hatin]

I'm humanist, I don't give it to anyone.

[impakt]

I strongly dislike feminism, it's bullshit. I do know some smart phd-girls that I respect though.

[SR4]

wow, trolling just made me think of the term "repetition is the mother of knowledge", which was taught to me in 4th grade or something. When I got the hang of irony a couple of years later, I thought that it's probably the true enemy of knowledge. What also springs to mind is how categorizing always fucks argumentations up. To argue, please state your view on the central expressions, so that you know you're dealing with the same things.

 

In my case, I don't tell ppl actively I'm a feminist, or check a box in a poll if I consider my self feminist - but what does that actually say about my views on women or men? Nothing. I just don't like categorizing too much of my self as I feel it hinders a free life. That said, I do get the need of putting a label on stuff, and defining it, to be able to talk about it or investigate it at all.

 

this is some real shit.

 

feminism is a pretty roughshod term

 

Then it's clearly a public issue, as it is part of a greater narrative (sorry, lack of better word) in which women are presented and perceived as weaker. Thus you wouldn't blame the single person but rather his or her socialization.

 

I don't even get why some are hating on the guy. For fucks sake he's giving his seat to some person, how do you know he wouldn't have done the same thing for a man.

 

this is one of the problems indicative of a struggle to define feminism or at least mount a cohesive structural argument.

 

civil rights leaders and intellectuals along with most continental philosophers struggle with this exact same problem.

 

if it is a structural problem, how can we advise changing the structure without leaving remnants of it behind? especially when our language is created simultaneously with the evolution of political power structures?

[eugene]

eugene - well considering "the sociological imagination" is a widely-used book in the field...

 

anyways take his example of unemployment - when 1 out of 100,000 is unemployed, that is a personal trouble. When 15 million are unemployed out of 50 million employable people, it is a public issue.

 

So is Keanu giving up his seat a personal trouble (that is, only keanu is doing it), or is it a public issue (many people are doing it) and if it is the latter what does it say about changes in society. If it is the former, what does it say about men's normative roles in society?

the latter then, but changes in society ? i don't see how do you expect me to go from this example to something that vast. what are you implying ?

[chenGOD]

Why do you think that some people would see this as an issue in society? What has changed in society that would make it seem that giving up your seat is considered douchey?

[essines]

terrible

[delet...]

The problem with those money earned by industry stats, is that they aren't talking about on a like for like role basis. It's just an industry wide average. Which is misleading to the casual observer as in general many women leave the workforce for a number of years to start a family. So overall have achieved through their life lower ranked positions in each industry. Thereby pushing down their average yearly generated income. And even those that keep working but have a family take more days off to deal with it, push for roles with more flex-time. This also contributes in making them less competitive in their focus for advancement.

 

There are a number of important factors like those two i mentioned which effect those stats. Not wanting to work the overtime or night and weekend shifts for example is another factor. In every role i've been in my female counterparts have been paid the exact same amount per unit of work. And there strict laws in place for every job advertised to ensure that this is the case.

 

I personally think that it's a good thing if women go home to raise their children. It benefits society as a whole to have that stable loving home for its young. Rather than farming them off to expensive and dislocating childcare facilities, which can lead to poorer educational and mental development outcomes for those children.

[baph]

The problem with those money earned by industry stats, is that they aren't talking about on a like for like role basis. It's just an industry wide average. Which is misleading to the casual observer as in general many women leave the workforce for a number of years to start a family. So overall have achieved through their life lower ranked positions in each industry. Thereby pushing down their average yearly generated income. And even those that keep working but have a family take more days off to deal with it, push for roles with more flex-time. So you could say are less competitive in their focus for advancement.

 

There are a number of important factors like those two i mentioned which effect those stats. In every role i've been in my female counterparts have been paid the exact same amount per unit of work. And there strict laws in place for every job advertised to ensure that this is the case.

 

I personally think that it's a good thing if women go home to raise their children. It benefits society as a whole to have that stable loving home for its young. Rather than farming them off to expensive and dislocating childcare facilities, which can lead to poorer educational and mental development outcomes for those children.

 

Why can't men stay at home for the children?

 

[Guest sirch]

YEAH. i do.

[essines]

Lol, don't put us men on the same level as women!

[delet...]

The problem with those money earned by industry stats, is that they aren't talking about on a like for like role basis. It's just an industry wide average. Which is misleading to the casual observer as in general many women leave the workforce for a number of years to start a family. So overall have achieved through their life lower ranked positions in each industry. Thereby pushing down their average yearly generated income. And even those that keep working but have a family take more days off to deal with it, push for roles with more flex-time. So you could say are less competitive in their focus for advancement.

 

There are a number of important factors like those two i mentioned which effect those stats. In every role i've been in my female counterparts have been paid the exact same amount per unit of work. And there strict laws in place for every job advertised to ensure that this is the case.

 

I personally think that it's a good thing if women go home to raise their children. It benefits society as a whole to have that stable loving home for its young. Rather than farming them off to expensive and dislocating childcare facilities, which can lead to poorer educational and mental development outcomes for those children.

 

Why can't men stay at home for the children?

 

I don't see anything wrong with this idea. And it is slowly happening (with a couple of our very own watmmrs for example). I was just here to clarify on those stats.

 

You could argue that women make better first line carers, but i don't want to go there.

[QBLA]

The problem with those money earned by industry stats, is that they aren't talking about on a like for like role basis. It's just an industry wide average. Which is misleading to the casual observer as in general many women leave the workforce for a number of years to start a family. So overall have achieved through their life lower ranked positions in each industry. Thereby pushing down their average yearly generated income. And even those that keep working but have a family take more days off to deal with it, push for roles with more flex-time. So you could say are less competitive in their focus for advancement.

 

There are a number of important factors like those two i mentioned which effect those stats. In every role i've been in my female counterparts have been paid the exact same amount per unit of work. And there strict laws in place for every job advertised to ensure that this is the case.

 

I personally think that it's a good thing if women go home to raise their children. It benefits society as a whole to have that stable loving home for its young. Rather than farming them off to expensive and dislocating childcare facilities, which can lead to poorer educational and mental development outcomes for those children.

 

Why can't men stay at home for the children?

 

I don't see anything wrong with this idea. And it is slowly happening (with a couple of our very own watmmrs for example). I was just here to clarify on those stats.

 

You could argue that women make better first line carers, but i don't want to go there.

 

*Raises Hand*

[Guest disparaissant]

you're right that they aren't going entirely like-for-life delet, but there are a lot of studies that DO look into that, and they invariably find that women make less than men for the same amount of work. the % varies, but it is always less.

[Guest Iain C]

i'm not going to read this thread, but i'm going to take a wild guess and say most of you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about

[Guest Iain C]

well, i am lesbian, so ya got me there.

and in the same stroke proved your misogyny! way to go.

 

Well, I am not a misogynist, so ya didn't get me there

And in the same stroke proved your inability to make a coherent argument rather than resorting to Ad Hominem attacks.

 

"You know nothing about feminism and you're a misogynist."

 

How about you prove me wrong before you insult me?

 

 

Feminists constantly employ invalid and outdated statistics.

 

Women make MORE than men.

Women have an ADVANTAGE in applying for a job

Women have an ADVANTAGE in college acceptance and scholarship acquisition

 

What the hell else is there? Nothing worth complaining about considering the ridiculous amount of other problems which plague men and not women.

 

Going to go complain about the materialistic portrayals of the female body in the media? How about you put some damn clothes on and stop perpetuating those images, geniuses.

 

wow proven right

 

POOR MEN

 

BAAAAD WOMEN

[ganus]

one stupid troll + vamos =/= "most of you"

just sayin'.

[Guest Iain C]

holy shit I gotta see these stats, Zeff.

 

 

you could change the world with this evidence, no lies.

 

with all due rspct SR4 it wasn't too long ago you were claiming that all it takes to get tenure is big tits

[delet...]

you're right that they aren't going entirely like-for-life delet, but there are a lot of studies that DO look into that, and they invariably find that women make less than men for the same amount of work. the % varies, but it is always less.

 

hah !! So they are saying that even though they are getting the exact same hourly rate, they are doing more work in that hour, is that it.

 

typical women. (hah)

[Guest disparaissant]

you're right that they aren't going entirely like-for-life delet, but there are a lot of studies that DO look into that, and they invariably find that women make less than men for the same amount of work. the % varies, but it is always less.

 

hah !! So they are saying that even though they are getting the exact same hourly rate, they are doing more work in that hour, is that it.

 

typical women. (hah)

uhm, no.

they are not getting the exact same hourly rate.

or if they are, they are not being scheduled the same amount of hours.

its not like you can just, you know, walk in and punch in and work if you arent scheduled to work in a lot of jobs.

[Guest disparaissant]

i do realise you were probably joking its just 4 am and THERE ARE NO JOKES IN FEMINISM (joking)

[eugene]

Why do you think that some people would see this as an issue in society? What has changed in society that would make it seem that giving up your seat is considered douchey?

like i said earlier, it demonstrates and perpetuates inequality because it's considered a right thing to do. what has changed..i guess many people are becoming aware of this inequality and want to fight it, come with the gradual empowerment of women in 20th century.. it's one of the reasons i can think of.

[SR4]

holy shit I gotta see these stats, Zeff.

 

 

you could change the world with this evidence, no lies.

 

with all due rspct SR4 it wasn't too long ago you were claiming that all it takes to get tenure is big tits

 

LOL fair enough.

 

but in my defense, I was disappointed that a certain professor, not the dept. at my school was looking at beauty over brains, rack vs. results. So if I said tenure (did I say tenure? or just get a job? because thats two very different things), that was an exaggeration.fo

 

edit: found the quote. just to confirm

 

yeah ok. maybe you had some lazy kids, but I worked my ass off.

 

 

I published two articles in professional journals, have a book in publication talks, worked as a TA AND as an assistant in the library, while at the same time managing a 4.0. Don't fucking tell me someone was holding my hand for that shit.

 

 

The problem is simply that the job market cannot accommodate all of these new fresh outta grad school characters. I'm looking at a string of 3 or 4 teaching jobs, all part time. I realize I am going to be struggling for quite a while, but it takes a lot of fucking nerve to say I'm lazy and I'm entitled.

 

 

Theres also an amazingly bad systemic problem in academia. The older profs from "back when" won't leave, and they tend to throw their weight around in committee as violently as possible. Ive seen really good students with good ideas, good work ethic ruined because an 89 year old professor with tenure "doesn't care for them." Meanwhile a girl with big tits and no idea how to conduct research is groomed for a future position.

 

Everyone has it hard right now, which means we are entitled to bitch. That's what we are entitled to, if anything at all.

Meanwhile a girl with big tits.

 

God, how dare she.

 

 

Im talking about a particular professor, and I was talking about being groomed for a research position, not a tenured professor. It takes more than just a horny geriatric to gain tenure.