Feminism - Your thoughts on it.

Reku

Midna wrote: »

most of the problems are our own doing but like so many activists feminists seem to need to blame someone.

Universal truth there, we all prefer to focus on the problems we can convince ourselves as being inherent/due to others rather than seek out the problems closer to home that we have a real direct control over. It's a fundamental part of human nature to create groupings so as to convince ourselves we're in the best group, ignoring that group's failings while berating those of others, regardless of which is the more significant failing.
In a way it's a more global version (which both genders do) of the way women will stereotypically compete socially, trying to put down the competitors & draw everyones' attention to their competitors' failings so that they are left looking better by comparisson both to others and themselves.
Whether it be men vs. women, Irish vs. Polish, young vs. old, catholics vs. muslims, etc..., etc..., etc..., it's all the same old parp that people have been at for 3 million years.:(

Macha

I don't think its fair to blame feminists for trying to separate women out from men. They are merely trying to expose that these groups exist in society and that there are lines of discrimination drawn along them. I don't think ignoring that they exist does anyone any good.

Was talking with a friend over the weekend who works in a large accountancy firm. She said the amount of subtle sexism is insane. The boss will come in & go straight over to one of peers (a guy on the same internship & started exactly the same time as her) & start chatting about cricket scores, etc. The same happens in meetings. She said the only female manager there spent all her time trying to be a guy to fit in - making crude jokes, almost trying to hide her femininity. Very sad.

Reku

taconnol wrote: »

I don't think its fair to blame feminists for trying to separate women out from men. They are merely trying to expose that these groups exist in society and that there are lines of discrimination drawn along them. I don't think ignoring that they exist does anyone any good.

Not saying we should, just that a lot of the "issues" that draw headlines these days are no where near the scale they are made out to be, far too often problems sourced elsewhere (i.e. with men) are blown out of proportion while the contribution of women to social problems are played down.

taconnol wrote: »

Was talking with a friend over the weekend who works in a large accountancy firm. She said the amount of subtle sexism is insane. The boss will come in & go straight over to one of peers (a guy on the same internship & started exactly the same time as her) & start chatting about cricket scores, etc. The same happens in meetings. She said the only female manager there spent all her time trying to be a guy to fit in - making crude jokes, almost trying to hide her femininity. Very sad.

Whereas when my employer had many high ranking females the lads used to be driven crazy waiting 20minutes for the discussion of weddings to stop and the actual meeting they were there for to start. Less an issue of gender discrimination as common interest discrimination in both cases.

Macha

farohar wrote: »

Not saying we should, just that a lot of the "issues" that draw headlines these days are no where near the scale they are made out to be, far too often problems sourced elsewhere (i.e. with men) are blown out of proportion while the contribution of women to social problems are played down.

Do you have a few examples?

farohar wrote: »

Whereas when my employer had many high ranking females the lads used to be driven crazy waiting 20minutes for the discussion of weddings to stop and the actual meeting they were there for to start. Less an issue of gender discrimination as common interest discrimination in both cases.

Well think of what the end result is if all/most of the managers are male. This is where the argument for positive discrimination comes in.

Reku

As a better example to illustrate my point regarding common interest discrimination vs. gender discrimination. The members of a certain sports club in my workplace have always been shown a rather obvious level of favourtism regarding promotions and raises, for a long time this made it look like it was a "boys club" type thing where all the lads who were pally with that manager and drank with him did much better than the females, then a female joined the club, surprise surprise, promoted to head of a section within 3 months (one she was not in and knew SFA about how to run I might add). You can complain about this regarding companies that have predominantly male management as much as you like but reality is that the same thing goes on in companies that have mostly female management => not really an issue about gender as opposed to the differing interests typically held by genders, so unless you're advocating forcing people to partake in things they have no interest in from a young age I see no solution and don't see how it should even fall under the scope of feminist agenda. If the person had the same interests but was disregarded in favour of the other on basis of gender, then there'd be a gender problem, but in these cases there wasn't. Reality is that, on average men like to discuss sports & women don't, do the lads in work come over to me to discuss sports, hell no, I have no interest, but I also don't try to turn it into an issue of discrimination when I don't get preferential treatment from a manager who I barely talk to since we've little in common.

taconnol wrote: »

Do you have a few examples?

The wage gap. I've pointed to the reports dismissing it and explaining how it's womens' own choices in jobs that create it enough that I shouldn't have to look up the links yet again for you.

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

I don't think ignoring that they exist does anyone any good.

I don't think highlighting them helps. TBH we should as a society be striving to dismantle discrimination. A particular group, isolating themselves to combat a particular aspect of the overall problem only serves that group. This can compound the problem isolating other groups (ie: males).
I don't see how choosing to only represent one group will resolve the problem for others. ...but perhaps that doesn't bother that group?
I'm of the opinion that society as a whole should work together to combat social problems that apply to all; not single out groups.

Was talking with a friend over the weekend who works in a large accountancy firm. She said the amount of subtle sexism is insane. The boss will come in & go straight over to... She said the only female manager there spent all her time trying to be a guy to fit in - making crude jokes, almost trying to hide her femininity. Very sad.

Hummm there is so much wrong with this...
Firstly - what the hell is "subtle sexism"?
Secondly, the boss has a friend - and thats a problem?
Thirdly, why does your friend send all her time trying to be something shes not?
Your right, it is sad.
It's sad that your friend feels she needs to be something shes not
It's sad that her lack of self confidence is labeled as "subtle sexism".
It's sad that she can't recognise her own failing for what they are.
It's sad that your friends boss can't have a conversation/friend without being accused indirectly of being sexist.
That is very, very, sad.

Macha

Yeah I get your point. I don't think most men necessarily think "ooh a women - wouldn't want her in charge", just that they happen to know some of the men in the company better as they have common interests. But then again, a lot assume that women won't know anything. Eg: in my last job, there was a guy who played club rugby. Now I love rugby, go to all the hom Leinster matches & the 6 nations, etc. Know more about the rules than most guys. But this guy didn't want to talk to rugby with me, just with the lads - when some of them didn't have a clue & were more into their soccer.

On a similar point, dunno if anyone was listening to Newstalk this morning but they were discussing single-sex schools. I personally think these are such a bad idea & really instill this idea of gender in kids. I mean I came out of school & 99% of my friends were female - not a healthy mentality to head into society with.

Ah the wage gap issue. I think this one has been done to death but it isn't really as simple as women just choosing less paid jobs. I heard a journalist on the radio the other day saying that whever a deadline was extended in work, it was always the women rushing to the phones to make arrangements for the kids. Women are still largely left in charge of the kids & so are expected to fit their career around it.

Zulu - my friend was talking about a manager. The manager is not my friend. She was trying to be more male because, as it was told to me, she was the token female manager & was not included by the other managers. She felt she had to conform to their more macho personalities in order to fit in better. Yes it is sad, but it the situation was certainly not of her making.

I'll tell you what the hell "subtle sexism" is. It isn't chucking women out of their jobs as soon as their married, it's that woman being forced to "choose" a more flexible, less well-paid job because basically its her job to look after the kids. It's the study that I wrote about on here a while back, which showed that women are discriminated against when they ask for raises-subconsciously I might add, but discriminated against nevertheless.

It is the sort of sexism that cannot be legislated for-and I think an important point is that the law can only do so much & after that, it's up to the attitudes & behaviours of individuals. It's about the attitudes of society changing about stereotypes. Although of course there are a few blindingly obvious things that can be done like creating equal paternity leave & removing Article 41.2 from the bloody constitution.

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

Eg: in my last job, there was a guy who played club rugby. Now I love rugby, go to all the hom Leinster matches & the 6 nations, etc. Know more about the rules than most guys. But this guy didn't want to talk to rugby with me, just with the lads

OK, you class that as sexism? Perhaps he doesn't like you?
Anytime someone slights me, or ignores me, I don't assume it's sexism, I assume they're a dick.

On a similar point, dunno if anyone was listening to Newstalk this morning but they were discussing single-sex schools. I personally think these are such a bad idea & really instill this idea of gender in kids. I mean I came out of school & 99% of my friends were female - not a healthy mentality to head into society with.

That said, it's noted that girls perform better in single sex schools. Personally I'd but my child where ever they'll get the best academic education. The rest of their education I'd be eager to be a major part of.

Ah the wage gap issue. I think this one has been done to death but it isn't really as simple as women just choosing less paid jobs.

It has been done to death, and is still inclusive. I see all around a greater % of men who fight hard for their wage rise (whether or not they deserve it) and women who are happy to accept their first offer.

Zulu - my friend was talking about a manager. The manager is not my friend.

Eh, I know, but your friend is a manager right? I was talking about her manager when I say manager.

She was trying to be more male because, as it was told to me, she was the token female manager & was not included by the other managers.

Well that's a very silly reason. And could be grounds to be passed over for the next promotion. She got the job on the back of who she was I imagine, and now she's changing that to suit others. Perhaps she needs to reassess what her role requirements are.

She felt she had to conform to their more macho personalities in order to fit in better.

That is her fault, not anybody elses. If she didn't conform, preformed and got passed over - that would be sexist. Loosing confidence in yourself, and trying to change to suit others isn't sexist - it's foolish.

Yes it is sad, but it the situation was certainly not of her making.

What? Why isn't it? You said "she felt she had to conform". That's her issue.

I'll tell you what the hell "subtle sexism" is. It isn't chucking women out of their jobs as soon as their married, it's that woman being forced to "choose" a more flexible, less well-paid job because basically its her job to look after the kids.

oh right. I don't buy this one bit.

It's the study that I wrote about on here a while back, which showed that women are discriminated against when they ask for raises-subconsciously I might add, but discriminated against nevertheless.

I don't buy this either.

It is the sort of sexism that cannot be legislated for

Why is that?

and I think an important point is that the law can only do so much & after that, it's up to the attitudes & behaviours of individuals. It's about the attitudes of society changing about stereotypes.

This is a good point, but wouldn't we be better off striving as a whole?

panda100

It amazes me how much of a bad name feminism has.The media and western goverments have really done some clever marketing against feminists!

A movement that gave women the right to vote,brought women into the work place,allowed women to enter education,made women independent from their fathers and husbands...... Yet as women and men we distance ourselves from this feminist movement.

People on here keep talking about these radical, men hating,lesbian, 'bra burning' feminists who apparently give feminism a bad name? Has anyone ever actually come across any of these so called 'feminsts'? I havent, and I move in active feminists circles regularly. No one in the feminist movement ever burnt bra's, etc. There all myths conjured up by society to attack a movement that would shake a sytem that is build around the need to have women minding the children at home.
Just like how the media, as a tool of right wing goverments, skilfully turned the hijab/burka into an oprressive garment,a symbol of islamic fundamentalism.Yet for most muslim women its a defiant symbol against the superfical and sexualised trappings of women in western society ,women who are willing to mutilate their bodies in oder to look more pleasing to men.This is why so many more muslim women are choosing to wear the hijab today then they were twenty years ago.

So capitalism has turned liberating and empowering feminism,something both men and women should be so proud of, into a dirty word.

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

OK, you class that as sexism? Perhaps he doesn't like you?
Anytime someone slights me, or ignores me, I don't assume it's sexism, I assume they're a dick.

Well actually he was a dick. But it wasn't an isolated incident. It's happened to me a few times that the lads all sit around talking abotu rugby or weight training & all go a bit silent when I speak up.

Zulu wrote: »

That said, it's noted that girls perform better in single sex schools. Personally I'd but my child where ever they'll get the best academic education. The rest of their education I'd be eager to be a major part of.

Well I'm of the opinion that school is not just about academics. Its also about development of social skills. So your daugher gets an extra 20 points in her LC but has a stunted ability to socialise with boys. Plus I can tell you that having gone to a girls only school, there is something very intense, in a negative way, about it. Girls with eating disorders, girls talking about boys incessantly. Really it was a very unhealthy environment.

Zulu wrote: »

It has been done to death, and is still inclusive. I see all around a greater % of men who fight hard for their wage rise (whether or not they deserve it) and women who are happy to accept their first offer.

Again, this is covered in the study.

Zulu wrote: »

What? Why isn't it? You said "she felt she had to conform". That's her issue.

Sorry dude, but it happens all the time. I used to work in a pub & after work, all the guys would sit down & start talking about that girl with the HUUGE tits on table 10 blah blah. There was no way I could join in that conversation-just had to go home. Everyone wants to fit in with their colleagues.
Actually the first wave of feminism was exactly that-trying to become men. If you look at some of the fashion at the time, it was all trouser suits, big shoulders, trying to remove all traces of femininity. Thankfully, feminism as a movement has realised its not the best way forward.

Zulu wrote: »

oh right. I don't buy this one bit.
I don't buy this either.

Frankly Zulu, I'm not all that bothered whether you "buy" it or not. Its there, its happening and its something that all mothers have to deal with. The degree to which it is a problem, largely depends on factors such as the attitudes of their bosses & how willing their partners are to chip in.

Zulu wrote: »

This is a good point, but wouldn't we be better off striving as a whole?

How do you suggest we strive as a whole? Bottom line is the majority of people working for women's rights are women.

Zulu

panda100 wrote: »

Yet as women and men we distance ourselves from this feminist movement.

I distance myself from an elitist movement that appears in my world to be more concerned chastising people because they are men, than trying to improve society - not the history.

People on here keep talking about these radical, men hating,lesbian, 'bra burning' feminists who apparently give feminism a bad name? Has anyone ever actually come across any of these so called 'feminsts'?

Has anyone actually said that though? or is that just your own (mis)inturperation?*

Look what distances people is this "rage against the machine" attitude. To some people, chastising a person because they walk into a room and talk to a man about soccer, is petty. Some people would rather try to resolve the issues that prevent certain people in our society from getting into the room in the first place!

*perhaps it was mentioned prior to merge, but not in recent discussion though.

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

Look what distances people is this "rage against the machine" attitude. To some people, chastising a person because they walk into a room and talk to a man about soccer, is petty. Some people would rather try to resolve the issues that prevent certain people in our society from getting into the room in the first place!

Zulu you are totally missing my point and misrepresenting what I say. I don't actually give a damn about talking to these people or not. It's about being regularly excluded from conversations by certain people. If that person is a colleageue - whatever, their loss. If that person is my boss & the person in charge of my promotion? You bet I give a damn about it.

You need to realise that these little boys clubs contribute to stopping women getting ahead. You choose to see it as petty and turn a blind eye. Fine. Good for you. People who experience and experience the negative consequences have a different opinion on the matter. Exclusion from informal networking has been recognised as one of the main barriers to women's progression in the workplace. It's quite insulting to call the issue petty

I'm not saying these guys are evil or even doing it consciously a lot of the time and there has been stories of women doing the same so its obviously human nature.

Rozabeez

In my experience, people seem to think 'Feminists' are women that are trying to "Take control" etc, but Feminism is about equality, not domination. There seems to be very negative attitudes towards feminism, but then again there are different forms of feminism, some of which might attract negative attitudes, because of how the views/aims of the feminists are expressed etc.

http://www.umt.edu/wcenter/default_files/Page390.htm

I'm not quite sure how I personally feel about "Feminism" because due to the different forms, a lot of people have different ideas about what it actually means.

Reku

Zulu wrote: »

I don't think highlighting them helps. TBH we should as a society be striving to dismantle discrimination. A particular group, isolating themselves to combat a particular aspect of the overall problem only serves that group. This can compound the problem isolating other groups (ie: males).
I don't see how choosing to only represent one group will resolve the problem for others. ...but perhaps that doesn't bother that group?
I'm of the opinion that society as a whole should work together to combat social problems that apply to all; not single out groups.

Upside however being that a sense of being unfairly discriminated against, regardless of how groundless it might be, is quite the motivator. It's a lot more difficult to feel personally discriminated against if you are genuinely working on everyones' behalf and not just those issues that you feel affect you.

taconnol wrote: »

But then again, a lot assume that women won't know anything. Eg: in my last job, there was a guy who played club rugby. Now I love rugby, go to all the hom Leinster matches & the 6 nations, etc. Know more about the rules than most guys. But this guy didn't want to talk to rugby with me, just with the lads - when some of them didn't have a clue & were more into their soccer.

Had anyone let him know you were this big a fan? He may have made a bad assumption that you wouldn't be.

taconnol wrote: »

On a similar point, dunno if anyone was listening to Newstalk this morning but they were discussing single-sex schools. I personally think these are such a bad idea & really instill this idea of gender in kids. I mean I came out of school & 99% of my friends were female - not a healthy mentality to head into society with.

I went to a single sex primary and secondary school & I came out of school hating the f*ckers.:p

taconnol wrote: »

Ah the wage gap issue. I think this one has been done to death but it isn't really as simple as women just choosing less paid jobs. I heard a journalist on the radio the other day saying that whever a deadline was extended in work, it was always the women rushing to the phones to make arrangements for the kids. Women are still largely left in charge of the kids & so are expected to fit their career around it.

But is it A because of B or B because of A, do these women choose to have the more active role in their childrens lives or are they pushed into it by society and their partners? If it is out of choice there is no issue, in instances where they are pushed into it then something needs to be done.

taconnol wrote: »

I'll tell you what the hell "subtle sexism" is. It isn't chucking women out of their jobs as soon as their married, it's that woman being forced to "choose" a more flexible, less well-paid job because basically its her job to look after the kids.

But are they making that choice before or after becoming pregnant? If before then it's a case of them making the choice to look after the kids before there are any kids so I don't think one can claim it's a case of them being forced to. Simply that they accept the reality that no-one really gets to have it all. Any time invested in career is time lost from family and vice versa.

taconnol wrote: »

It's about the attitudes of society changing about stereotypes. Although of course there are a few blindingly obvious things that can be done like creating equal paternity leave & removing Article 41.2 from the bloody constitution.

Equal rights for fathers in the courts too. Try to encourage stay at home dads where both parties want it. But then I keep thinking of the stigma attached to a male nanny or male babysitter and feel that society's attitude towards the actual childcare abilities of males also needs adjustment before much progress will be made on this front.

panda100 wrote: »

It amazes me how much of a bad name feminism has.The media and western goverments have really done some clever marketing against feminists!

Don't forget Germaine Greer!

panda100 wrote: »

A movement that gave women the right to vote,brought women into the work place,allowed women to enter education,made women independent from their fathers and husbands...... Yet as women and men we distance ourselves from the current feminist movement.

Fixed for accuracy.

panda100 wrote: »

People on here keep talking about these radical, men hating,lesbian, 'bra burning' feminists who apparently give feminism a bad name? Has anyone ever actually come across any of these so called 'feminsts'? I havent, and I move in active feminists circles regularly. No one in the feminist movement ever burnt bra's, etc. There all myths conjured up by society to attack a movement that would shake a sytem that is build around the need to have women minding the children at home.
Just like how the media, as a tool of right wing goverments, skilfully turned the hijab/burka into an oprressive garment,a symbol of islamic fundamentalism.Yet for most muslim women its a defiant symbol against the superfical and sexualised trappings of women in western society ,women who are willing to mutilate their bodies in oder to look more pleasing to men.This is why so many more muslim women are choosing to wear the hijab today then they were twenty years ago.

Yet it's the same media who readily embraced the pay gap myth until it was properly explored by a more egalitarian feminist group. As for the hijab thing - figures please, and a very large proportion of western women are not willing to mutilate their bodies in order to look more appealing, it's the small minority we keep hearing about otherwise it would pass unnoted.

panda100 wrote: »

So capitalism has turned liberating and empowering feminism,something both men and women should be so proud of, into a dirty word.

I'd disagree and say that it wasn't capitalism, just the feminist-extremists, just like the Green party lost standing when a certain member decided they wanted airports shut down at night so the wildlife could sleep peacefully. Was peoples' views on that little idea not their own RATIONAL view or once more has capitalism snuck in and made us think what it wants us to think?

taconnol wrote: »

Zulu you are totally missing my point and misrepresenting what I say. I don't actually give a damn about talking to these people or not. It's about being regularly excluded from conversations by certain people. If that person is a colleageue - whatever, their loss. If that person is my boss & the person in charge of my promotion? You bet I give a damn about it.

You need to realise that these little boys clubs contribute to stopping women getting ahead. You choose to see it as petty and turn a blind eye. Fine. Good for you. People who experience and experience the negative consequences have a different opinion on the matter. Exclusion from informal networking has been recognised as one of the main barriers to women's progression in the workplace. It's quite insulting to call the issue petty

I'm not saying these guys are evil or even doing it consciously a lot of the time and there has been stories of women doing the same so its obviously human nature.

This could be a Kazobel scenario though (look through Kazobel's threads on AH and you'll understand - no offence intended Kazobel, it's just those threads are the most effective way I can currently think of to illustrate the point.), in that you presume it's because of what you are as opposed to who you are, a person doesn't click with you and you jump to discrimination as opposed to simple conflict of personalities. I've always been rather undervalued in my current job and it wasn't until I'd a manager who had to chip in and see how much work I had to do that it was noticed, discrimination since the other management prefered to hang out and chat with the lads who went out on the piss and watched sports, oogled women etc..., or simple reality that had I made the effort to pretend to fit in I could have fixed it. The mountain will not come to Mohammed so Mohammed must go to the mountain, or Mohammed can just sit in peoples' way holding a placard that the mountain is discriminating against him.

Macha

Yeah farohar I agree with everything you said. I feel so sorry for that guy in PI who is being abused by his wife & is worried that no one will believe him. Just awful.

Definitely a lot of women choose home over career & that's great but when you have stats like 70% of recruitment agencies in the UK being asked not to look for women of child-bearing age, I'd say sometimes that choice is being made for them.

I suppose the point I was trying to make about the guy & the rugby was that I don't understand guys who stick with guys & girls who stick with girls. And I think a lot of that comes from going to single-sex schools. They were saying on the radio that we have one of, if not the highest % of kids in single-sex education. It's totally bizarre & artificial.

JC 2K3

taconnol wrote: »

Zulu you are totally missing my point and misrepresenting what I say. I don't actually give a damn about talking to these people or not. It's about being regularly excluded from conversations by certain people. If that person is a colleageue - whatever, their loss. If that person is my boss & the person in charge of my promotion? You bet I give a damn about it.

You need to realise that these little boys clubs contribute to stopping women getting ahead. You choose to see it as petty and turn a blind eye. Fine. Good for you. People who experience and experience the negative consequences have a different opinion on the matter. Exclusion from informal networking has been recognised as one of the main barriers to women's progression in the workplace. It's quite insulting to call the issue petty

Why is this specifically a women's issue though? Surely it's just an issue of favouritism in the workplace due to common interests, and a man with no interest in sports in a work environment where collegues bonded with one another through conversing about sports would be at just as much of a disadvantage?

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

It's happened to me a few times that the lads all sit around talking abotu rugby or weight training & all go a bit silent when I speak up.

So what? They go silent to allow you to talk, and thats bad? What do you want them to do? If you can't make friends with them, perhaps it's a personality thing, not a sex issue.

Well I'm of the opinion that school is not just about academics. Its also about development of social skills. So your daugher gets an extra 20 points in her LC but has a stunted ability to socialise with boys.

But thats YOUR opinion of school. People have friends from home etc. and other ways to develop social skills. You are projecting your own negativity on to a child.

Plus I can tell you that having gone to a girls only school, there is something very intense, in a negative way, about it. Girls with eating disorders, girls talking about boys incessantly. Really it was a very unhealthy environment.

How do you know if it's any different in a single sex school?

Sorry dude, but it happens all the time. I used to work in a pub & after work, all the guys would sit down & start talking about that girl with the HUUGE tits on table 10 blah blah.

You see I could take offence to this, and cry about it: men talk about more than just big tits/thats a prejudice stereotype. This is part of the issue I have with elite groups - they breed stereotypes like this one.

There was no way I could join in that conversation-just had to go home.

You'll never make friend with people unless you join in; you'll never change the conversation unless you participate.

Everyone wants to fit in with their colleagues.

Accusing them of "subtle sexism", and only talking about big tits, coupled with indirectly labelling them sexist isn't going to help you fit in.

Frankly Zulu, I'm not all that bothered whether you "buy" it or not.

Well you should be, because I'm a member of the same society you are trying to change.

How do you suggest we strive as a whole? Bottom line is the majority of people working for women's rights are women.

That's probably true, just as the majority working for travellers rights are probably travellers. The same can be said for all minorities I'd wager.

Macha

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Why is this specifically a women's issue though? Surely it's just an issue of favouritism in the workplace due to common interests, and a man with no interest in sports in a work environment where collegues bonded with one another through conversing about sports would be at just as much of a disadvantage?

Ah no I'm not saying its just a women's issue. I'm certainly not claiming that women have a monopoly on discrimination. My point is that the people who are in charge of making decisions about raises & promotions are mainly men. And that women are, to a certain degree, excluded from the informal networks that surround these important people.

This article explains it better:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/mar/06/women.discriminationatwork

Marit Hoel is the founder of the Oslo-based Centre for Corporate Diversity, which helps companies to find experienced female non-executive directors. In Norway, as a sociologist in the 1980s, she was the first person to begin counting women - or the lack of them - on boards. In response to the growing criticism that women of ability and experience were in short supply, she called a press conference. She spoke no words. Instead, she showed the photographs of 100 senior women with a brief resume of their cvs. "It was my Beckett moment," she says. "The pictures said it all. Experienced women are out there in quantity. The problem, as elsewhere, is that they are literally not seen. Men have their own network."

In Norwegian, the network is called "gutte klubben grei", the grey men's club. Ada Kjeseth, 58, from Bergen, knows how it operates. An economist and accountant, she was appointed in 1988 as the first woman to join the non-executive board of Norsk Hydro, now the third largest supplier of aluminium in the world. She is now on eight boards (not all publicly listed), covering interests that include insurance, property and car imports. "Since last year," she says, smiling. "They keep knocking on my door."

Referring to the power of the gutte klubben grei, she says, "They meet in places where only men meet. They go hunting and fishing and drinking together. People who know people are appointed. I wish the quota hadn't been necessary, but I'm a realist. It forces men to look beyond their magic inner circle."

Every International Women's Day, Kjeseth adds, a friend holds a dinner for 70 women, all at the top of their respective companies. "Each year, I look around the room and I get goose bumps. Men have networked for years but don't recognise it as networking. When we do it, they become alarmed. I don't know why," she adds mischievously.

Dragan

Rozabeez wrote: »

In my experience, people seem to think 'Feminists' are women that are trying to "Take control" etc, but Feminism is about equality, not domination. There seems to be very negative attitudes towards feminism, but then again there are different forms of feminism, some of which might attract negative attitudes, because of how the views/aims of the feminists are expressed etc.

http://www.umt.edu/wcenter/default_files/Page390.htm

I'm not quite sure how I personally feel about "Feminism" because due to the different forms, a lot of people have different ideas about what it actually means.

Just like any other ideal a lot of "feminists" have done little to promote the positive aspect of in the public eye.

Personally i don't care much for Feminism, the same way as i don't care much for Racism, Sexism or the majority of other ISMs.

Pop those three letters onto the end of a word and i will quickly lose interest.

JC 2K3

taconnol wrote: »

Ah no I'm not saying its just a women's issue. I'm certainly not claiming that women have a monopoly on discrimination. My point is that the people who are in charge of making decisions about raises & promotions are mainly men. And that women are, to a certain degree, excluded from the informal networks that surround these important people.

I'd say men with unconventional interests or personalities would be equally as excluded.

The difference being, they're less easy to count than women.

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

Zulu you are totally missing my point and misrepresenting what I say. I don't actually give a damn about talking to these people or not.

I'm not. You made this case - I'm refuting it because I don't agree. For example:

It's about being regularly excluded from conversations by certain people. If that person is a colleageue - whatever, their loss. If that person is my boss & the person in charge of my promotion? You bet I give a damn about it.

I get left out, and have been left out of many such conversations because I hate soccer, it bores the shit out of me. I also much prefer small breasts.
However, I don't blame anyone else. I get involved when I can. I change the conversation when I can. I strike up other conversations when I can. All in all, I get on with everyone I work with.
You see, I get on with it because it's human nature.

You need to realise that these little boys clubs contribute to stopping women getting ahead. You choose to see it as petty and turn a blind eye. Fine.

No I don't. Men discussing a topic of interest isn't a "little boys club soley charged with keeping women in their place". In fact, modern industery (from all my experience) is soley interested in money and results. It couldn't give a tupenny fuck about sex.

People who experience and experience the negative consequences have a different opinion on the matter. Exclusion from informal networking has been recognised as one of the main barriers to women's progression in the workplace. It's quite insulting to call the issue petty

Are we talking "about not being allowed" exclusion, or "they talk about stuff so I don't get involved so thats sexist", because the former is a problem, but one I've never seen or heard of myself, except by heresay, whereas the latter is the one I taught we were discussing and is very petty indeed.

I'm not saying these guys are evil or even doing it consciously a lot of the time and there has been stories of women doing the same so its obviously human nature.

You say that like you don't believe it! :eek:
It happens. I've had more than one lunch hour devoted to Sex in the City, in which I haven't been able to say a word.

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

So what? They go silent to allow you to talk, and thats bad? What do you want them to do? If you can't make friends with them, perhaps it's a personality thing, not a sex issue.

Zulu, I'm not discussing this with you because you're choosing not to understand what I mean.

Zulu wrote: »

But thats YOUR opinion of school. People have friends from home etc. and other ways to develop social skills. You are projecting your own negativity on to a child.
How do you know if it's any different in a single sex school?

Because I went to a fantastic, normal co-ed primary school. Because I talk about it with friends of mine who went to mixed secondary schools & because I talk about it with friends of mine who went to my school and other single sex secondary schools.

Zulu wrote: »

You see I could take offence to this, and cry about it: men talk about more than just big tits/thats a prejudice stereotype. This is part of the issue I have with elite groups - they breed stereotypes like this one.

Ugh I'm not generalising or making a sterotype. I'm talking about something that actually happened-I'm not making it up in order to perpetuate a sterotype :rolleyes: Really your posts are becoming more and more churlish.

Zulu wrote: »

You'll never make friend with people unless you join in; you'll never change the conversation unless you participate.
Accusing them of "subtle sexism", and only talking about big tits, coupled with indirectly labelling them sexist isn't going to help you fit in.

I had 3 options in that situation. I could either try to steer the conversation another way (tried a few times & gave up), put on my lesbian hat & join in (thanks but no thanks) or just not waste another hour of my time & go home (bingo).

Zulu wrote: »

Well you should be, because I'm a member of the same society you are trying to change.

I'm not bothered, Zulu, because I'd rather debate it with people like farohar who have an ability to dicuss the issue without dismissing the other person's opinions in the condescending way that you do. I think you just have a problem with the world feminism & every time this topic comes up you come rushing down to challenge any female who claims to be discriminated against in a systematic way. It's quite tiring & pointless for me to debate you, as you seem to have little inclination to actually change your opinion, despite any evidence offered.

Edit: God who dragged this thread up again? This thread feels like groundhog day

Zulu

OK, fine taconnol, dismiss me and any of the points I'm making as churlish. If you can't accept someone challenging your opinion thats fine.

I hope the irony of how you have just treated my point isn't lost.

Reku

taconnol wrote: »

Edit: God who dragged this thread up again? This thread feels like groundhog day

Agree 100%
If for nothing else in life this thread does make me feel it'd be a good thing to be able to "walk a mile in someone else's shoes", help me understand peoples' views on these issues better as if there's one thing this thread has convinced me of it's that until we can do that the issue as to where genuine discrimination on gender exists or not will not be resolved.

lol, come to think of it while using the bathroom in work this morning the ladies one happened to be open as I passed. Didn't get a proper look but by the dimensions the room appeared to be there could be at most 2 cubicles, the mens have 2 cubicles and 3 urinals, this brought the thought of is it discrimination?
There are fewer female staff than male so should there be fewer female toilets, or would an equal number of each be fairer. Aiming for equality can and will wreck your head at times.;)