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

Sn@kebite

It's well known that boys are disadvantaged in education. It starts in early years education.

Girls are emulating older versions of themselves as most teachers are female so there a role-model imbalance. Also girls are more represented in education an example being when girls lag behind boys it's seen as gender gap and female teachers mobilize and set up programs to close the gaps in physics/applied maths areas. Whereas boys who lag in almost all other areas (and the gaps are widening) female teachers do not mobilize and do not set anything up the describe the gap as "equality has finally been achieved!" then stereotypes like "boys are lazy/boys mature slower" etc.. start flying. Yet boys do well when male teachers show up and it's spotted as a role-model advantage and males dominate the most difficult degrees (e.g. engineering, aerospace physics, astrophysics, actuarial science, computer science) so the arguments males mature slower or are lazy is flawed.

Also if you look at university the efforts engineering schools put into getting women into engineering yet health sciences especially mental health are over 95% female dominated so mental health care is seen through a female lens while this may not connect with men very well or will be limited and feminism loves it. Can women therapists understand a depressed father going through a divorce as well as a man can? Probably not.

Men are horrifically to blame for not getting off our arses and boys are facing bias problems. The arrogance is astounding, looking for funding to create jobs for otherwise unemployable social studies nerds. Gotta put that sociology degree to use somehow!

iptba

Sn@kebite wrote: »

It's well known that boys are disadvantaged in education. It starts in early years education.

Girls are emulating older versions of themselves as most teachers are female so there a role-model imbalance. Also girls are more represented in education an example being when girls lag behind boys it's seen as gender gap and female teachers mobilize and set up programs to close the gaps in physics/applied maths areas. Whereas boys who lag in almost all other areas (and the gaps are widening) female teachers do not mobilize and do not set anything up the describe the gap as "equality has finally been achieved!" then stereotypes like "boys are lazy/boys mature slower" etc.. start flying. Yet boys do well when male teachers show up and it's spotted as a role-model advantage and males dominate the most difficult degrees (e.g. engineering, aerospace physics, astrophysics, actuarial science, computer science) so the arguments males mature slower or are lazy is flawed.

Also if you look at university the efforts engineering schools put into getting women into engineering yet health sciences especially mental health are over 95% female dominated so mental health care is seen through a female lens while this may not connect with men very well or will be limited and feminism loves it. Can women therapists understand a depressed father going through a divorce as well as a man can? Probably not.

Men are horrifically to blame for not getting off our arses and boys are facing bias problems. The arrogance is astounding, looking for funding to create jobs for otherwise unemployable social studies nerds. Gotta put that sociology degree to use somehow!

I was friendly with some girls who were studying social work and the class was around 90% female. And then quite a bit of the stuff they were studying was influenced by feminism. I could imagine this could lead to group think and a lack of balance, probably causing more problems than a gender imbalance in say IT professionals.

Sn@kebite

iptba wrote: »

I was friendly with some girls who were studying social work and the class was around 90% female. And then quite a bit of the stuff they were studying was influenced by feminism. I could imagine this could lead to group think and a lack of balance, probably causing more problems than a gender imbalance in say IT professionals.

It's well known. Yes. The problem is it's not just female dominated it's gynocentric as in it doesn't look at problems as they are it's how males are the problem. The telling attribute is that they sit with their backs to the real patriarchies. As in the more oppressed women are in the world, the less this uni degrees want to mention it. I guess they lose 'woke points' for being critical of other cultures.

H3llR4iser

Sn@kebite wrote: »

Men are horrifically to blame for not getting off our arses and boys are facing bias problems. The arrogance is astounding, looking for funding to create jobs for otherwise unemployable social studies nerds. Gotta put that sociology degree to use somehow!

I completely agree, yet the issue might be past a rational resolution now, and possibly locked out onto a collision course that will spell disaster and a fundamental reset/rethink of the matter.

Fact is, we've actually reached the stage where what you correctly point out CAN'T BE SAID in public, without some horrible label being attached to you - sexist, mysoginist, "conservative", fascist even - and as we saw multiple times, nobody is safe from it, not even the women who pointed out the problem. Any initiatives, documents, campaigns aimed to help boys & men will be trashed by the media as it doesn't fit their narrative.

As for role models...frankly, any man going into teaching now or already in the profession, has a lot of bollocks as he's basically gambling with his own career and even life. All it takes is a bit of an argument with a student, they go home and accuse him of some sexual approach or something, he's pretty much as good as dead.

When I was a teen, during secondary school, it wasn't too uncommon for a teacher to ask a misbehaving/underperforming student -boys or girls alike, with no difference- to either talk in the corridor or to meet them in the teacher's hall. It was for when a proper, monumental dressing down was to be given, but they were sensible and smart enough to spare you the embarrassment of having to endure it in front of your classmates.

Imagine doing that now with a female student - "teacher called me out, we were alone and he touched my arse/b00b!". Game over.

Sn@kebite

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Fact is, we've actually reached the stage where what you correctly point out CAN'T BE SAID in public, without some horrible label being attached to you - sexist, mysoginist, "conservative", fascist even - and as we saw multiple times, nobody is safe from it, not even the women who pointed out the problem. Any initiatives, documents, campaigns aimed to help boys & men will be trashed by the media as it doesn't fit their narrative.

Women's activists in the 1900s certainly didn't get the red carpet rolled out for them so its a bit negative to be like that. The issue is most women know it's bull**** also, the only groups who follows suit are these not-very-bright white, middle-class females in universities in the social science streams. Along with their not-very-bright guilt-ridden male colleagues. TCD is a nest of them (I've studied there).

There's a lot of money at stake here and as male groups form it will be a direct threat to their funding and resource monopoly. I honestly think if you talked about male issues in the 90s it would be laughed at more than now. The problems boys, men face are undeniable even to the most strident leftist.

Feminism requires guilt-tripping as a mechanism of control over the dialogue along with shaming ("you're mansplaining, poor menz, you're a white male" etc.. ) but the major flaw is white, rich feminists know not to go on a guilt trip themselves of how white female voices or rich female voices are centered in the framework of their movement which dominates women (and men) at the bottom. White feminists know not to pander from guilt and slobber all over women at the bottom, this shows the guilt of the left is disingenuous. Whatever way we look at it hypocrisy is the shadow of feminism (and most leftist views) as I would say 90% of women can see it. Feminism fights for rich, white, well-connected women to be equal with rich, white, well-connected men. Once a person can see this hypocrisy and you state it that feminism is reinforcing inequality their ability to to use guilt ceases to function so a real dialogue can form.

If you look at TED and TEDx talks there are more and more about male problems I can link some here if anyone wants. So there is a shift forming it's not as simple as being too late.

Sn@kebite

Sn@kebite wrote: »

Women's activists in the 1900s certainly didn't get the red carpet rolled out for them so its a bit negative to be like that. The issue is most women know it's bull**** also, the only groups who follows suit are these not-very-bright white, middle-class females in universities in the social science streams. Along with their not-very-bright guilt-ridden male colleagues. TCD is a nest of them (I've studied there)..

There's a habit of assigning the feminist or SJW crusades to middle class people, which did reflect the past, however, time has moved on. More people with working class backgrounds have made it into universities in all countries, and with the growth of social media, there's less emphasis on having financial support in needing to be an activist. You'll find plenty of women with working class backgrounds in college/university who will blindly harp on about the evils of inequality, often taking economic inequalities (that their parents experienced), and assigning them to issues of sexism.

For example, I remember a chat I had with a student whose father was dead, and had been raised solely by her mother. Her mother had never finished the leaving cert, and so, had ended up being restricted to basic jobs. Due to the levels of jobs, and limited welfare supports, their life has been rather basic, with the daughter reaching university due to the State financial supports. For her, this was a sign of sexism. That her mother was forced to work the lower end jobs was an issue that targeted vulnerable women, rather than a lack of education or skills on the part of the mother. The student used all manner of personal examples to show how sexism/inequalities affected her.... but to me, each example was less about sexism, and more about personal choice and circumstance.

The problem with sexism is that it's become something that covers just about everything when it relates to the victim. Victims are given complete freedom in terms of responsibility, and everything that negatively affects them is translated into becoming examples where they were put down by others... usually "men". "Men" being a vague body of people who simply exist, like the boogeyman.

Reverse sexism is now institutionalised. It's in our government, and public service when women are elevated to roles because of their gender, or financing is awarded to women simply due to their gender. It's there in our schools. It's there pretty much everywhere in society.... because women are legally equal with men, and have no real need for such help. It simply comes down to personal choice, and mantaining the victim image.

Sn@kebite

Deleted User wrote: »

and everything that negatively affects them is translated into becoming examples where they were put down by others... usually "men". "Men" being a vague body of people who simply exist, like the boogeyman.

Reverse sexism is now institutionalised. It's in our government, and public service when women are elevated to roles because of their gender, or financing is awarded to women simply due to their gender. It's there in our schools. It's there pretty much everywhere in society.... because women are legally equal with men, and have no real need for such help. It simply comes down to personal choice, and mantaining the victim image.

That's true but still humans normally manipulate historical injustices a bit like talkling about Isreali air-strikes and the holocaust will usually get mentioned to derail.

It's still something I think can be corrected over time, but one of the worst problems is the silence of men so women only hear their own rhetoric parroted by women whose careers depend on keeping the victim-hood going (feminists) to keep themselves propped up in university faculties dominating social science depts. There's no doubt it's a big problem.

Look at Biden, he's was accused of rape and feminism has nothing to say because he's "one of them". It's a kind of arrogance that is undeniable that feminism is not about justice but to see what it can get.

Sn@kebite

Sn@kebite wrote: »

That's true but still humans normally manipulate historical injustices a bit like talkling about Isreali air-strikes and the holocaust will usually get mentioned to derail.

It's still something I think can be corrected over time, but one of the worst problems is the silence of men so women only hear their own rhetoric parroted by women whose careers depend on keeping the victim-hood going (feminists) to keep themselves propped up in university faculties dominating social science depts. There's no doubt it's a big problem.

Look at Biden, he's was accused of rape and feminism has nothing to say because he's "one of them". It's a kind of arrogance that is undeniable that feminism is not about justice but to see what it can get.

The problem is..... what is feminism? Feminism is a lot like BLM or any other social movement founded along Marxist principles. I'm not talking about political science here. I'm talking about structure.

You have a central aim which is generally quite vague and can cover just about everything. There's no inner council, or leadership to represent the movement, instead, there are dozens or hundreds of chapters (associated groups) who will push the agenda, but don't represent the actual movement. So, they can make extreme statements and actions, and not be held accountable, but still, promote the cause through their presence.

People like to think of Feminism as being the same as it was in the 70s/80s, but it's evolved over time. Now, in reality, feminism is everywhere and represents everything. It's not about equality.. it never was... but it will be promoted as such, because equality captures the attention of people. So, they can push for ever greater rights for women, and more marginalisation of men, while also claiming that such groups don't represent the average woman. In spite of most women saying that they don't consider themselves to be feminists, feminism has more support now, than ever before... why? Because they can distance themselves when needed, and then come back, when everyone has forgotten what was said/done. Society has shifted away from informed discourse, to being informed of what we should think... and it's works.

As for men accepting it all, that's changing. There's far more pushback than ever before, and I see it growing as time goes by. Feminism because of how it's organised will generate the very resistance that it needs to exist. Such a movement needs an enemy, and men will step up eventually to become that enemy simply because they won't have any choice in the matter.

bcklschaps

Read this article in IT.

This is wildly sexist...and there would be marches on the streets if the genders were reversed. Note the uproar about pension entitlements for married women recently.

Child maintenance payments should be tax deductible, simples.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/can-both-parents-claim-the-single-person-child-carer-tax-credit-1.4331554?mode=amp



For those that can't access the article...this is the guts of it.

"There is a credit available to single parents – called, logically, the Single Person Child Carer Credit. It has replaced a previous One-Parent Family Tax Credit since 2014 and is designed precisely to help people looking after dependent children on their own.

There is nothing to stop this being claimed by the father or the mother. But the key thing is that it an be claimed only by one or the other. This is the major difference with the old one parent family credit which could be claimed by both as long as the child or children lived with each of them for part of the year.

As you say, it is very likely that your children’s mother will also be claiming the single person child carer credit, so how do you, and more importantly, the Revenue Commissioners, figure out who gets it?"

silverharp

I think the UN can fk right off

https://twitter.com/UN/status/1302593895029714944

The J Stands for Jay

silverharp wrote: »

I think the UN can fk right off

https://twitter.com/UN/status/1302593895029714944

From the speech: "While statistics indicate that women and girls are at lower risk from the COVID-19 virus itself, they are suffering because of the redirection of health funding and services."

Silentcorner

At least now we know where all those gender studies students ended up...those that got jobs from their useless degrees that is!!!

ahnowbrowncow

No

McGaggs wrote: »

From the speech: "While statistics indicate that women and girls are at lower risk from the COVID-19 virus itself, they are suffering because of the redirection of health funding and services."

Is that not because a higher proportion of health funding and services is spent on women?

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

I think the UN can fk right off

The UN equality organisations prioritize women's rights over equality for both genders. All of their press releases regarding "equality" have minimized the needs of males, while promoting the needs of females.

So, yeah, I've long considered the UN to be one of the biggest opponents of genuine equality.

Pawwed Rig

An article which begins by objectifying the male body and ends by criticising men for objectifying women.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/05/sorry-gym-bunnies-but-men-with-dad-bods-make-better-fathers-every-time?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1599394649

Sn@kebite

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

An article which begins by objectifying the male body and ends by criticising men for objectifying women.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/05/sorry-gym-bunnies-but-men-with-dad-bods-make-better-fathers-every-time?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1599394649

So it's talking about men's bodies and in the sixth paragraph she manages to both 1) talk about herself (as middle-class white women invariably do) and 2) mention how women are the real victims of objectification and have it worse.

The column sounds like a not very bright teenage girl's journal entry of a disorganized musing. And this is mainstream Graun. Crazy.

silverharp

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

An article which begins by objectifying the male body and ends by criticising men for objectifying women.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/05/sorry-gym-bunnies-but-men-with-dad-bods-make-better-fathers-every-time?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1599394649

will she do a follow up on how men view gym thots as potential mothers? and something something big butts being “pluralistic mating strategies”:pac:

py2006

I wasn't sure which thread to put this one in.

Harmange, a 25-year-old activist from Lille, said the book is an invitation to women “to imagine a new way of being, to take less account of the often unsupported opinions of men, to consider the adage ‘it is better to be alone than in bad company’ seriously, and to rediscover the strength of female relationships full of reciprocity, gentleness and strength”.

Padraig Mor

py2006 wrote: »

I wasn't sure which thread to put this one in.

So basically it's a feminist version of MGTOW? I thought feminists hated MGTOW?

The J Stands for Jay

Padraig Mor wrote: »

So basically it's a feminist version of MGTOW? I thought feminists hated MGTOW?

They should move to communes on opposite sides of a lake. With a film crew.

iptba

50 female entrepreneurs with new businesses based in rural Ireland will be selected for a free, government-backed development initiative.

Any woman with a new business or ‘well-developed’ idea for a new venture they want to get off the ground can apply for the latest cycle of development initiative ACORNS.

This is the 6th year of the Government-backed ACORNS programme, which is supported by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, under its Rural Innovation and Development Fund.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-40049015.html

py2006

Here is another gem in todays Times about mansplaining :rolleyes:

The J Stands for Jay

py2006 wrote: »

Here is another gem in todays Times about mansplaining :rolleyes:

Womansplaining is a growing problem. Women assuming men couldn't possibly know about certain subjects

py2006

McGaggs wrote: »

Womansplaining is a growing problem. Women assuming men couldn't possibly know about certain subjects

I've met and worked with women that do this kinda thing too. Its a personality trait that some people have. Most don't realise they are being patronising and would be apologetic if the knew. But there are those (woman and men) who are just downright obnoxious.

Its twisted now into anything men say to women is mansplaining.

Example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJyQpRfaGnw

It's a word that's used by sexists. Just because women use the term doesn't stop it from being sexist.

There's some absolute gold in that IT article. The "Himpathy" bit in particular which is probably exact opposite of how things go in real life.

iptba

One of its purposes is presumably to shut someone up so neither you nor the others listening have to listen to what people have to say. And related to this, it’s a means of shaming the speaker.

I remember the debating societies when I was in college, which wasn’t today or yesterday. People mainly in the inner circle would say “shame shame” quite often if a person started saying something they didn’t agree with. It basically acted to restrict free speech and freedom of thought.

The J Stands for Jay

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's some absolute gold in that IT article. The "Himpathy" bit in particular which is probably exact opposite of how things go in real life.

Sounds a bit like homeopathy. I wonder is it because they're both a load of ****e?

The J Stands for Jay

iptba wrote: »

People mainly in the inner circle would say “shame shame” quite often if a person started saying something they didn’t agree with.

- Sounds like something from a Ross O'Carroll-Kelly book
- They don't seem to be great at debating.

iptba

McGaggs wrote: »

- Sounds like something from a Ross O'Carroll-Kelly book
- They don't seem to be great at debating.

Indeed. It was TCD. Quite a lot of influential people in Ireland seem to have gone through such societies over the years though I don’t know how long the “shame shame” thing lasted or whether it still exists today.

Sleepy

The "shame, shame" thing is pretty much universal in debating societies, most often used as an in-joke to heckle extremely good speakers (or committee members) in my experience (the Lit n Deb in NUI, Galway). I believe it originates from Westminster.

py2006

Another Irish times classic sexist article for today

iptba

py2006 wrote: »

Another Irish times classic sexist article for today

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/men-should-be-taught-to-do-fair-share-of-housework-from-early-age-1.4370511

terryduff12

Talk about outdated views, he must be looking for funding.

givyjoe

iptba wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/men-should-be-taught-to-do-fair-share-of-housework-from-early-age-1.4370511

I look forward to the gender balanced article referencing a "women's charity", that girls must learn to do their fair share of DIY from an early age.

Sleepy

Half of who's idea of housework? Most rows about one partner not doing their "fair share" tend to come from the partner with a preference for a higher standard of cleanliness than the other. Or from the partner who works the shorter hours and whines that the other party doesn't split the housework 50/50 with them.

Sleepy

Sleepy wrote: »

Half of who's idea of housework? Most rows about one partner not doing their "fair share" tend to come from the partner with a preference for a higher standard of cleanliness than the other. Or from the partner who works the shorter hours and whines that the other party doesn't split the housework 50/50 with them.

Or those who make the most mess in the first place and expect their mess to be sorted along with the actual cleaning.

99nsr125

Sleepy wrote: »

Half of who's idea of housework? Most rows about one partner not doing their "fair share" tend to come from the partner with a preference for a higher standard of cleanliness than the other. Or from the partner who works the shorter hours and whines that the other party doesn't split the housework 50/50 with them.

Teachers, everytime ^^^^^^^^

99nsr125

99nsr125 wrote: »

Teachers, everytime ^^^^^^^^

My parents are both teachers. Nah. Don't go blaming teachers for this kind of carryon. If anything, I'd be pointing fingers at part-timers, or those on flexi-time..

iptba

Andhra Pradesh government to release 55 women prisoners

[..]

Explaining the reason for giving remission to them, Sucharitha said, "A woman is the most important institution in our family structure. A woman’s absence disturbs the entire family system. Women get themselves reformed very fast and also develop a sense of remorse for the crime committed by them and they are less likely to go back to their old ways again."

https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/andhra-pradesh/2020/nov/07/andhra-pradesh-government-to-release-55-women-prisoners-2220565.html

cms88

Deleted User wrote: »

My parents are both teachers. Nah. Don't go blaming teachers for this kind of carryon. If anything, I'd be pointing fingers at part-timers, or those on flexi-time..

Soooo teachers...

99nsr125

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My parents are both teachers. Nah. Don't go blaming teachers for this kind of carryon. If anything, I'd be pointing fingers at part-timers, or those on flexi-time..

Definitely teachers then

py2006

https://twitter.com/Suffragentleman/status/1329420457083363329?s=20

py2006

https://twitter.com/Suffragentleman/status/1329422694782210049?s=20

hots

py2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Suffragentleman/status/1329420457083363329?s=20

Ah tbf the front page of google is hardly the biggest concern. International Men's Day should be at the stage where it can stand on it's own merits and not be a 'what about...'.

hots

Also it's not a day to be combative in my opinion, Twitter (a rare foray on there today) is full of good messages but also full of 'men are X% more likely to Y'... it just dilutes the message of what's important.

iptba

hots wrote: »

Also it's not a day to be combative in my opinion, Twitter (a rare foray on there today) is full of good messages but also full of 'men are X% more likely to Y'... it just dilutes the message of what's important.

I'm not sure there is only one correct way to approach the issues.

hots

iptba wrote: »

I'm not sure there is only one correct way to approach the issues.

No 100% agreed there. Just for me I think making today about positive actions on it's own right is the way I would like it to be. There's lots of other days to point out the imbalances.

py2006

In fairness, the Google home page should be highlighting things like mental illness, talking etc

Padraig Mor

Just the latest pair of articles from the Examiner which seems to be trying to outdo the Times recently with its man hating content.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-40086191.html
This one beggars belief. A few excerpts:
"But it's never ever their fault, is it? When it comes to crimes of a sexual nature, offences that disproportionately affect women, the victim is always to blame in the court of public opinion, the perpetrator a ghost-like figure with no agency of his own"

" as a society we inadvertently protect rapists, perverts and pedophiles with the myths we choose to continue believing.....These rapists, perverts and pedophiles aren't monstrous social outcasts living under bridges in trench coats, they're your college classmate, they're your professional colleague, they're your five-aside teammate, they're your neighbour"

"Sexual-based crimes might be illegal but they are not socially taboo"

Ludicrous. We live in a society where sex offenders have to be segregated for their own protection in prison as even the lowest of the low view them with contempt - yet the author claims that sex crimes "are not socially taboo"?! Frankly, the claims are so at odds with reality that my opinion is that the author is plain old lying and making stuff up to support her argument.


https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-40087109.html
The bould Louise O'Neill, who has been rather quiet recently, is back on form - and even name checks Boards as a site where she has been called a man hater. The piece byline claims that she is "not targeting individual men (#NotAllMen)" - yet the headline reads "Talk to your sons, rather than warning your daughters"......sounds like blaming all men to me Louise! In between pimping her books she further claims that "all [feminists] have ever argued for is equal rights and opportunities for men and women" - a claim that is demonstrable as false by a quick flick through this forum alone. Women have equal rights in Ireland, and (many) feminists are looking not for equality of opportunity (which they have), but equality of outcome.