Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

Calhoun

Calhoun wrote: »

I don't believe there is some grand conspiracy by women to overthrow men and put us into a position of 2nd class citizens.

Agreed. I don't think there are organizations out there with that purpose. Doesn't mean it won't happen though. It's like a rockslide. It starts with lots of pebbles falling down first, loosening the foundation of the other areas, until you get the remainder sliding down also.

While there isn't a group of the matriarchy, or patriarchy, there is a momentum to the "feminist" cause, and we can see that in the way the laws have changed over the last three decades with a definite bias towards women. Even without massive campaigns or protests, we can see that the laws have been changed gradually in small steps. If they were changed in large steps, then perhaps more people would sit up and notice.

I believe men are part of the problem when it comes to some of the stuff you have talked about below. The ratio of male to female teachers in primary education i would think is more to do with men following what they believe would be more lucrative careers.

Yup. Agreed, although consider for a moment the background of teaching with their councils and local bodies. Back 30-40 years ago, the vast majority of those that sat on those councils were men (and priests/nuns), and we saw a larger amount of men in teaching. Now, those councils are being pushed to hold more female representatives and the ratio of teachers has changed. I know plenty of men who trained to be teachers, couldn't get jobs and then changed their careers to other industries because 'competition' for places were too high.

What i mean by the whole fought and died thing was the generally western society today is built upon and influenced by what happen in the last two world wars. In and Irish context it was it would have been the war of independence but we would also have been influenced by what was happening with our neighbors over seas. My point in all this was we didnt just arrive where we are today with all the rights and privileges we have.

Of course not. But most of the rights we have today were born out of the civil rights and womens rights movements of the 70s/80s. I have enormous respect for what feminists sought 30-40 years ago. I just feel that feminism has achieved most of what was needed, and there's little place for it now, although that doesn't stop the changes occuring.

I believe there will be a point where a bigger and greater resistance will be felt if we go to far down the rabbit hole of reducing male rights. We aren't exactly a peaceful nation either just look at the north we have only just recently resolved that and probably not permanently.

Not peaceful? Hmm... Neutral during WW2 although with a clear bias towards the allies. Not participating in any foreign ventures except for peacekeeping. The north? A relatively small number of people fighting for their view of Ireland, which wasn't generally shared by most Irish people. The war of independence, in spite of our official history books, didn't have the overwhelming public support imagined, and the changes were brought about by a relative minority. The civil war? A temper tantrum where Irish people decided to kill other Irish people, and then rejoin the government, and generally stifle our growth from decades afterwards.

The whole disenfranchisement item is an interesting one, while there are many reasons for why it happens today in Ireland in particular its getting worse for young males. We only have to look at the likes of the suicide rate, if we keep down the men are bastards route who knows where things will end up.

Fair enough.

You also should never say die when it comes to organized religion, look at all the foreign fighters that fought for ISIL. I also dont want to call out one religion, i believe anyone disenfranchised if open to influence from such organizations.

In the west we have managed to separate religion from culture. Islam doesn't. You can't separate their culture, religion and society. They're bound together. So for western society, religion is dying. Outside of the "West", religion is still a major issue. (not just Islam).

I agree with you on people welcoming extremes which is why i don't think things will go down easily. We are naturally prone to war as a people and we wield violence as a tool for change when we feel all the political options are closed to us.

Yup, which will just play into the hands of the feminists who see men as violent and unreasonable 'beasts'.

Don't get me wrong, i agree with you the outlook you have painted is what feminists would like us to get to. However i just think collectively as humans and men in particular we use and wield violence as tools when we feel the political options have failed us.

I don't think violence will get us any of the balances we would want anyway. Western society sees itself as being better than that, and any violent behavior to achieve rights will ultimately fail in the long run.

The only way a war of conquest can succeed now is through a total war, with the destruction of a people afterwards. Otherwise, you have to deal with reprisals, guerilla warfare, UN politics, etc. A war between the genders would be much much worse than that.

Nah. Honestly, the men and women who want freedom and an honest society, need to strive towards a balance. A recognition that while we are individuals and some people have the attributes of the other genders, there are differences between the genders, and we should seek a society that reflects that. Give choice to people in how they want to live their lives, without this need to judge everyones choices.

I'll give an example. A female friend of mine from China visited me last year and stayed a few months. She's a very beautiful woman (early 30s), with no interest in having equality. She's the Chinese equivalent of a mistress, "a second wife", where the first wife actually found her for her own husband. She isn't married, doesn't want children, is given an apartment and a hefty allowance. We went out one night here and met some other friends of mine, and one of my friends' girlfriend started grilling her about her lifestyle. My Chinese friend couldn't understand why a woman wouldn't want to be pampered, taken care of and allowed to explore all aspects of being a traditional woman. The Irish girl kept getting angry at my friend (and me by association), for allowing herself to be enslaved... and that she was fooling herself if she thought she was happy. My Chinese friend is extremely happy with her lifestyle because she is set for life. She doesn't care what other women want to do, and just concentrates on her own life. But the Irish girl worked herself up into a tissy over the choices another woman made for her life.

If we want gender equality, I think we need to stop this judging of other peoples choices. I get criticised because I gave up a profitable career in finance to become a lecturer in China, and now I'm freelancing developing internet games. I'm broke. but I'm enjoying my life. However, there is a common trend of thought from people suggesting that my life choices are somehow wrong. That I should behave and aspire to what they believe is important. I find that mostly comes from women, whereas most men go "cool".

Calhoun

I guess we will have to wait and see, I just don't trust humans in general not to resort or revert to violent nature. I think what we are both saying might come to pass, yours first then what I was saying after.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote:

I dunno if things will go that way exactly, will men just happily slink into the background and be second class citizens? You got to remember that the rights we enjoy today are because people fought and died for them. It would seem to me that the more you disenfranchise the youth the more you open yourself up to some real social problems.

What kind of social problems do you mean? Are you seriously talking about a violent conflict between men and women or is there some deeper meaning that I'm missing?

Deleted User wrote:

The Fear I have with western culture is that feminists will continue with a dual campaign of the weak female that is under threat from men, and also at the same time, a superiority complex thingy where women are more sensitive, intelligent but also strong. Two systems working together, but will ultimately work to place men as the second-class citizens.

Deleted User wrote:

You can already see it happening in part within the law, and the pressure on society to view men as predators who need to be 'controlled' or properly 'educated' to become 'real' men. Instead, boys are being raised and educated with no real connection to being a man, and encouraged to feel guilty for every possible action a man might have done ever against a woman. And then, of course, some boys/men rebel against such views and reinforce the impression that men are dangerous. Of course, not all men, but enough to be a threat to women in general.

Deleted User wrote:

You'll find that it is the vulnerable sensitive women that needs a guardian and the guardian will be the strong intelligent female. A matriarchy society, perhaps, where the women have all power and rights, with men being used for lower activities that women don't want to do, and men having 'less' rights than a woman.

This world you're describing is a sad and disturbing place. I'm glad I don't live in it. Nobody has made me feel like a predator or a second class citizen for my gender. If people make you feel like that, that's really sad.

Calhoun

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What kind of social problems do you mean? Are you seriously talking about a violent conflict between men and women or is there some deeper meaning that I'm missing?

No i mean youth turning to other ways/structures to fit in/achieve. Like the growth of the criminal cartels and gangs in the inner city/poorer areas of Ireland.

You look at some of the criminal fraternity and they live and die by the sword violence is a currency as such and sometimes the more they yield it the more status it brings.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote:

No i mean youth turning to other ways/structures to fit in/achieve. Like the growth of the criminal cartels and gangs in the inner city/poorer areas of Ireland.

Ah ok. I thought you meant something else.

Calhoun wrote:

You look at some of the criminal fraternity and they live and die by the sword violence is a currency as such and sometimes the more they yield it the more status it brings.

Is that really anything to do with gender stuff? I've always seen gangs as more about class and social structures. I imagine gang members have had little prospects and little guidance and social structures. So a gangs give a social group, a fraternity with social structure (a gang). Where does gender stuff fit into this?

Calhoun

I used it as an example I was mainly pointing out the disenfranchised youth look to other ways and means to develop their own structures of power ect. Sometimes not be peaceful means.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote:

I used it as an example I was mainly pointing out the disenfranchised youth look to other ways and means to develop their own structures of power ect. Sometimes not be peaceful means.

Does it actually have anything to do with gender issues then?

Calhoun

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Does it actually have anything to do with gender issues then?

My responses were talking about it in line with klazs comments about a feminist outlook that would leave men as second class citizens.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote:

My responses were talking about it in line with klazs comments about a feminist outlook that would leave men as second class citizens.

I don't understand. It only works if you presume that the feminist outlook would leave men as second class citizens? Is this some kind of parallel universe you're describing or the one we both live in?

Calhoun

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I don't understand. It only works if you presume that the feminist outlook would leave men as second class citizens? Is this some kind of parallel universe you're describing or the one we both live in?

I wasn't saying that, not my argument to have with you nor do i want to anyway. I was just advising why the above wouldnt or couldnt happen.

Arghus

I have never experienced sexism.

Honestly, I don't think I have.

Wibbs

maybe

Arghus wrote: »

I have never experienced sexism.

Honestly, I don't think I have.

I can't think of a situation where I have either TBH. I have seen examples of it with other guys. In the corporate world. Things like being passed over for advancement within companies because of a HR need to fill places with more women kinda thing. I've seen it in a couple of cases of divorce where kids are involved and the mothers being given far more leeway regarding financial support and automatic custody. Including one case where the mother in question was appallingly lax in her parental duties and it taking many years of this being obvious before the court saw the father's side.

Pawwed Rig

Wibbs wrote: »

I can't think of a situation where I have either TBH. I have seen examples of it with other guys. In the corporate world. Things like being passed over for advancement within companies because of a HR need to fill places with more women kinda thing. I've seen it in a couple of cases of divorce where kids are involved and the mothers being given far more leeway regarding financial support and automatic custody. Including one case where the mother in question was appallingly lax in her parental duties and it taking many years of this being obvious before the court saw the father's side.

Until I got married and had kids I have to say I never thought about it much but there is so much bigotry and discrimination when dealing with the State services it blows your mind*. I posted here before about being refused child benefit because I am a man (The man can only claim it if the woman is dead).
The HSE and DSP are openly hostile to men. Luckily I haven't had to deal with the legal system (yet ) but have heard horror stories.
Then you have the everyday 'innocent' sexism like being told to ask my wife about an issue with the kids by creche worker.
Othertimes assuming I could not change a nappy.
Having to go into the lady's toilet to access changing facilities (Ireland is actually pretty good in this regard but other countries are not so good).


* I still await a response to my e-mail to the minister for equality Francis Fitzgerald (at the time) asking what action points are being put in place to address the underperformance of boys v girls in state exams. I am not holding my breath.

silverharp

^^^

I cant say i have come across much, when I was wooing ms Harp , we frequented one restaurant where the ladies menu didnt have prices

As you say its when you have to rub up against the system you might see the nasty side of it.

Wibbs

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The HSE and DSP are openly hostile to men.

Actually you've reminded me of my personal experience with a section of the HSE and SW and yes, while not hostile, they were dismissive and one even admitted to me that there was an anti male bias in my particular circumstance.

Pawwed Rig

silverharp wrote: »

As you say its when you have to rub up against the system you might see the nasty side of it.

Off topic but the education system is worse. They openly discriminate against all manner of people quite legally it seems. Every application form we are filling out for junior infants (yes for a 4 year old) asks for details of religion and acceptance that your child will participate in the ethos of the school. He is 3 at the moment and is just aware of Santa.
To get back on topic segregation of sexes in schools is a bit off the wall isn't it? We criticise Saudi Arabia for the same thing but happily put our children through the same thing.

So I guess my point is that the biggest discriminator in the State is the State itself.

silverharp

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Off topic but the education system is worse. They openly discriminate against all manner of people quite legally it seems. Every application form we are filling out for junior infants (yes for a 4 year old) asks for details of religion and acceptance that your child will participate in the ethos of the school. He is 3 at the moment and is just aware of Santa.
To get back on topic segregation of sexes in schools is a bit off the wall isn't it? We criticise Saudi Arabia for the same thing but happily put our children through the same thing

there is a push in the US to offer more singe sex schools, the argument being that boys dont get a fair shake of the stick in mixed schools. i guess in Ireland the teachers arent as "feminist" as the US but based on studies there is a case that female teachers are more likely to have an in group preference so that fact that most teachers are female is an issue in itself.
if you focus on the fact that boys and girls learn and develop differently you would want an element of segregation so you can tweak the system they learn under.

Evd-Burner

I've experienced sexism from the Guards on family law matters as a male. I've had issue with the other party where I have needed to call the guards to intervene, only to be told that it is a civil matter that they cannot take any action. The ex then calls regarding the same issue and the guards call out to my house within a few hours to investigate, they were extremely arrogant at my front door, especially when I reminded them that this was a civil matter that there was nothing they could do other than leave the property.

silverharp

just posting for the humour value , one would have thought the answer was obvious

newport2

silverharp wrote: »

just posting for the humour value , one would have thought the answer was obvious

Q: Why do so few women take engineering/STEM courses?

A: Sexism and a male dominated environment.


Q: Who do so few men take gender studies courses?

A: We've no idea, it's bizarre.

El_Duderino 09

silverharp wrote: »

just posting for the humour value , one would have thought the answer was obvious

I’m assuming that you haven’t read the article before posting so there’s no point asking you what you thought of the article content rather than the headline.

Given the interest men in these threads have in gender issues, it’s actually a fairly relevant question to pose. Why would so many men have a stake in gender issues and then leave it up to women to solve the problems.

I’m fairly certain you didn’t mean it to be an interesting topic for discussion, but I found it interesting at least. So thanks.

backspin.

Gender studies courses are seen by most men as feminist propoganda.

El_Duderino 09

backspin. wrote: »

Gender studies courses are seen by most men as feminist propoganda.

That’s the impression I’ve picked up from the men in these threads alright. I don’t know anything else about those courses so that’s all the info I have about them.

Are they actually anti men? In what way?

py2006

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are they actually anti men? In what way?

Are you saying feminist propaganda equals anti-male?

El_Duderino 09

py2006 wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are they actually anti men? In what way?

Are you saying feminist propaganda equals anti-male?

Aha I see what you did there. Very good.

I’m not saying that. I should have used the posters exact phrase in the question.

I’ll ask the question again: are they actually feminist propaganda? If so, in what way?

sharper

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ll ask the question again: are they actually feminist propaganda? If so, in what way?

I don't know to what degree any of this can be generalised. You'd likely need to look at specific courses and I don't think "feminist propaganda" is a helpful label anyway.

One important factor I think is that "gender studies" is relatively recent. These courses were previously known as "women's studies" and for the most part the syllabi was simply rebranded. Even a casually interested man browsing potential elective courses may well see little of interest or relevance to him.

Another is that men are generally a minority in third level education outside of a few well known STEM subjects. You generally don't expect to see many men in whole swathes of topics.

Wibbs

maybe

sharper wrote: »

One important factor I think is that "gender studies" is relatively recent. These courses were previously known as "women's studies" and for the most part the syllabi was simply rebranded. Even a casually interested man browsing potential elective courses may well see little of interest or relevance to him.

This. Even the most cursory reading on the topic gives one a good idea of what to expect. As you said rebranded women's studies.

El_Duderino 09

Wibbs wrote: »

This. Even the most cursory reading on the topic gives one a good idea of what to expect. As you said rebranded women's studies.[/quote]
Is that a good or bad thing?

The article linked above said the course content isn’t just about women’s issues but also explores man’s issues.

backspin.

I saw a headline on rte.ie about gender imbalance at Irish universities and for a split second thought, finally some focus on the imbalances men face in the education system. But no it was about the lack of women getting the top jobs...

backspin.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The article linked above said the course content isn’t just about women’s issues but also explores man’s issues.

I'm got to make a wild guess here. Will that focus on men's problems be portrayed as issues with toxic masculinity and the solution for them to be found in feminism?

El_Duderino 09

backspin. wrote: »

I'm got to make a wild guess here. Will that focus on men's problems be portrayed as issues with toxic masculinity and the solution for them to be found in feminism?

I don’t know. I don’t have any experience with these courses. You can make that assumption if you like but what would you base that assumption on?

Carlos Orange

No

backspin. wrote: »

I saw a headline on rte.ie about gender imbalance at Irish universities and for a split second thought, finally some focus on the imbalances men face in the education system. But no it was about the lack of women getting the top jobs...

Hardly surprising. Saw this on RTE.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1106/917746-girls-single-sex-schools-survey/


Buried at the bottom was

"Boys were more likely than girls to feel that they were able to have their say in the classroom or the school."

Carlos Orange

No

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I don’t know. I don’t have any experience with these courses. You can make that assumption if you like but what would you base that assumption on?

Gender studies is just an extension of feminism. People are bound to assume the same things about it as they do feminism.

More measurably. The public events page says women 23 times. It doesn't say men once.

https://www.gender.cam.ac.uk/Events/publicevents

backspin.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I don’t know. I don’t have any experience with these courses. You can make that assumption if you like but what would you base that assumption on?

A lot of the toxic masculinity theories seem come out of gender studies departments. Anytime I've heard a gender or woman's studies professor on radio, print or TV that's the picture they have painted. As I've said I'm no expert but that is the sense I get.

One eyed Jack

psinno wrote: »

Hardly surprising. Saw this on RTE.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1106/917746-girls-single-sex-schools-survey/


Buried at the bottom was

"Boys were more likely than girls to feel that they were able to have their say in the classroom or the school."

I sincerely hope that they have someone proof-read that study before it's published, to avoid silly errors like this -

The subjects were teaching methods came in for most criticism were Maths, Irish, and English, in that order.

El_Duderino 09

psinno wrote: »

Gender studies is just an extension of feminism. People are bound to assume the same things about it as they do feminism.

More measurably. The public events page says women 23 times. It doesn't say men once.

https://www.gender.cam.ac.uk/Events/publicevents

Ok.

It’s a Pity that gender issues affect both men and women, and only one gender is actively involved in the academic side of it. It’s likely that only one side will be in a position to change things.

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok.

It’s a Pity that gender issues affect both men and women, and only one gender is actively involved in the academic side of it. It’s likely that only one side will be in a position to change things.

Well, government is a position of influence, mainly dominated by men and more than capable of making positive changes for women. Shouldn't be too hard for women in positions of influence to do the same.

Saruhashi

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’m assuming that you haven’t read the article before posting so there’s no point asking you what you thought of the article content rather than the headline.

Given the interest men in these threads have in gender issues, it’s actually a fairly relevant question to pose. Why would so many men have a stake in gender issues and then leave it up to women to solve the problems.

I’m fairly certain you didn’t mean it to be an interesting topic for discussion, but I found it interesting at least. So thanks.

It's an interesting area of discussion but if I was going to do a college or university course then I'd almost certainly choose something that was going to help me either get or further a career.

How many men are expected to support their family? How many women want to "marry up" and be with a man who earns a good amount of money?

My impression is that a gender studies qualification will not lead to a good career. My impression is that many people who do gender studies courses will be looking to their family or partner or the government to support them financially.

It also really feels like the content of these courses are very much grounded in an ideology that cannot really be questioned. If I didn't believe in the concept of "male privilege" would I even be able to pass the course?

Obviously if I believed in Creationism then my ability to pass an Evolutionary Biology class could be severely impaired so why would I even join the course?

I think that many women have the perception that STEM is full of sexism and bias and a bit of a "boys club". This probably leads them away from STEM.

At the same time, the perception of gender studies is that it is actively anti-male and there is a possibility that some of your classmates and even lecturers could have genuine hatred for men and boys. This wouldn't just lead men away from gender studies but would leave them thinking that gender studies graduates are hateful, bitter, people.

Do you think that Gender Studies has a bit of a PR problem?

El_Duderino 09

givyjoe wrote: »

Well, government is a position of influence, mainly dominated by men and more than capable of making positive changes for women. Shouldn't be too hard for women in positions of influence to do the same.

In an ideal world. In reality government policy is shaped by lobby groups. Feminists are active on lots of levels while I don’t think men’s rights advocates are active in as many ways.

El_Duderino 09

Saruhashi wrote: »

It's an interesting area of discussion but if I was going to do a college or university course then I'd almost certainly choose something that was going to help me either get or further a career.

That’s grand, neither did I. I didn’t study hundreds of courses available.

Saruhashi wrote: »

How many men are expected to support their family? How many women want to "marry up" and be with a man who earns a good amount of money?

Expected to support their family by whom? I’ve no idea how many women want to marry up. I married laterally- if that’s a term- so I do t have any personal experience to draw on.

What I would say is that I see gender equality as releasing men and women from the expectations of previous generations and their gender roles. E.g. the man must be the breadwinner while the woman is the homemaker. Gender equality is about giving people the freedom to choose how to arrange their own affairs.

Saruhashi wrote: »

I think that many women have the perception that STEM is full of sexism and bias and a bit of a "boys club". This probably leads them away from STEM.

At the same time, the perception of gender studies is that it is actively anti-male and there is a possibility that some of your classmates and even lecturers could have genuine hatred for men and boys. This wouldn't just lead men away from gender studies but would leave them thinking that gender studies graduates are hateful, bitter, people.

Do you think that Gender Studies has a bit of a PR problem?

Yeah I’d say there’s a PR problem alright. You outline 2 stereotype views of course areas there STEM and gender studies. I doubt either is particularly accurate or helpful. So addressing the PR side would be a good start.

Carlos Orange

No

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What I would say is that I see gender equality as releasing men and women from the expectations of previous generations and their gender roles. E.g. the man must be the breadwinner while the woman is the homemaker. Gender equality is about giving people the freedom to choose how to arrange their own affairs.

Maybe conceptually it is. Practically "gender equality" usually isn't. It is largely restricted to one gender.


Look at the World Economic Forum gender gap report.

http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2017/dataexplorer/

There are 93 countries that score a 1.0 in for Enrolment in tertiary education.
The actual gender ratio of enrolment varies wildly. All the measure actually cares about is that more women go to tertiary education than men.

Saruhashi

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That’s grand, neither did I. I didn’t study hundreds of courses available.

Expected to support their family by whom? I’ve no idea how many women want to marry up. I married laterally- if that’s a term- so I do t have any personal experience to draw on.

What I would say is that I see gender equality as releasing men and women from the expectations of previous generations and their gender roles. E.g. the man must be the breadwinner while the woman is the homemaker. Gender equality is about giving people the freedom to choose how to arrange their own affairs.

Yeah I’d say there’s a PR problem alright. You outline 2 stereotype views of course areas there STEM and gender studies. I doubt either is particularly accurate or helpful. So addressing the PR side would be a good start.

Right so the PR problem is part of the issue then. Men don't feel like they would be welcome in gender studies classes. We have part of the answer.

People only have freedom to choose to a certain extent. Further education is expensive. If I don't have enough money then I can't attend gender studies classes. If I do have enough money and time to attend further education then I want to make sure that money and time is invested wisely and I will reap the benefits in future years.

You can release people from gender roles but you can't release them from the obligation to pay for their rent or their bills. So there has to be a question of whether or not gender studies is a viable financial choice. My first impression is that it is not. Certainly not for a man.

While I may be released from expectations and gender roles it does not mean that other people will be. I might be OK with my partner being the homemaker while I am the breadwinner so long as we have a healthy and mutually beneficial relationship. I might even sacrifice some freedoms to be happy.

Yes, I'd be free to choose gender studies but why bother when I could choose STEM and increase my bank balance and my value to potential partners?

El_Duderino 09

psinno wrote: »

Maybe conceptually it is. Practically "gender equality" usually isn't. It is largely restricted to one gender

Is that the same gender that tends to get actively involved in the topic? And the gender that tends to be more involved in the study of gender issues? And the same gender that actively lobbies government to have their issues addressed?

El_Duderino 09

Saruhashi wrote: »

Right so the PR problem is part of the issue then. Men don't feel like they would be welcome in gender studies classes. We have part of the answer.

People only have freedom to choose to a certain extent. Further education is expensive. If I don't have enough money then I can't attend gender studies classes. If I do have enough money and time to attend further education then I want to make sure that money and time is invested wisely and I will reap the benefits in future years.

You can release people from gender roles but you can't release them from the obligation to pay for their rent or their bills. So there has to be a question of whether or not gender studies is a viable financial choice. My first impression is that it is not. Certainly not for a man.

While I may be released from expectations and gender roles it does not mean that other people will be. I might be OK with my partner being the homemaker while I am the breadwinner so long as we have a healthy and mutually beneficial relationship. I might even sacrifice some freedoms to be happy.

Yes, I'd be free to choose gender studies but why bother when I could choose STEM and increase my bank balance and my value to potential partners?

Are you asking me to convince you to do a gender studies course? That’s not what I’m doing. You can do as you please.

As this relates to gender studies and men/women talking part in the courses. Is it very surprising that one gender tends to be more active in gender issues, and that gender is currently more successfully achieving change for the issues most important to them?

Zulu

No

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Is that the same gender that tends to get actively involved in the topic? And the gender that tends to be more involved in the study of gender issues? And the same gender that actively lobbies government to have their issues addressed?

Unconscious bias must be a shockingly pervasive problem in such a group.

sharper

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

As this relates to gender studies and men/women talking part in the courses. Is it very surprising that one gender tends to be more active in gender issues, and that gender is currently more successfully achieving change for the issues most important to them?

Have you considered the way you're framing this?

Men are heavily represented in other areas however the context this is presented in is not that they are "more successful" at it but that the "dominate" it or "oppress" other from participating it.

Areas where men are not represented are areas where men "fail to participate" or "fail to place value on".

Where women are heavily represented it is because they are better, more successful, better suited and have made better choices.

Where women are not represented it is because they are opressed, harrassed, forced out.

Do you see how the above has altered your thinking on this?

Saruhashi

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are you asking me to convince you to do a gender studies course? That’s not what I’m doing. You can do as you please.

Please, let's not go through all this again.

No. I am not asking you to convince me to do a gender studies course.

I don't even know where you are getting that idea from.

Carlos Orange

No

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Is that the same gender that tends to get actively involved in the topic? And the gender that tends to be more involved in the study of gender issues? And the same gender that actively lobbies government to have their issues addressed?

Fair enough. I agree with your point that gender equality largely isn't about gender equality but people lobbying for rights for themselves. It isn't really all that surprising that men don't attend genders studies courses.

Saruhashi

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

As this relates to gender studies and men/women talking part in the courses. Is it very surprising that one gender tends to be more active in gender issues, and that gender is currently more successfully achieving change for the issues most important to them?

No. It's not even slightly surprising. Clearly if the conversation on gender issues is dominated by women's perspectives then it follows that women would be more successful at achieving goals that are important to them.

Hold up though. I thought this field was changed from "women's studies" to "gender studies"? So why wouldn't people involved in pushing for change in gender issues be pushing equally for change for ALL genders?

The gender of the people doing the pushing should not be relevant. If the push is for gender equality then one gender should not be benefiting more than the others.

Why would men have to take part in the courses at all to see any benefit?

We don't see that kind of divide in other fields. Even though STEM fields are dominated by men, women are not excluded from enjoying the benefits of STEM developments.

So why should men not benefit equally from the work of gender studies graduates regardless of the gender of those graduates?

tritium

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok.

It’s a Pity that gender issues affect both men and women, and only one gender is actively involved in the academic side of it. It’s likely that only one side will be in a position to change things.

Interesting. And then you see how academics like Warren Fsrrell have been hounded to get them away from mainstream gender studies once they stopped subscribing to the standard dogma. You might almost suspect that only one side being in a position to change anything was the goal rather than a side effect.....