User Tag List

Page 112 of 162 FirstFirst ... 1262102110111112113114122 ... LastLast
Results 1,111 to 1,120 of 1614

Thread: 3rd wave feminism

  1. #1111
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BadOctopus View Post
    Not everything is about sex. Men take unnecessary risks even when there are no women around to witness them.

    Perhaps I am an anomaly, but I prefer men who don't do shockingly stupid things to impress me.
    The sex explanation doesn't require a direct witness:
    Most of society's heterosexual, the opposite gender's preferences become social expectations of your own gender, social expectations become measures of self esteem.

    This can be used to explain several phenomena:
    It's with a subconscious belief that women desire masculine traits that men call each other pussies.
    It's with a subconscious belief that men desire sexual exclusivity that women call each other sluts.
    It's why women might dress sexy to make themselves feel good by associating I themselves with beautiful women idealized in society.
    It's why men might take a lot of risks to make themselves feel good by associating themselves with heroic men idealized by society.


    But... there might be contradicting evidence on this:
    If my memory's not failing me, I believe I've read a study that found a strong correlation between risky and risk-averse behaviors with different levels of testosterone between individuals of each gender.
    This suggests that even within women, who experience the feminine side of social expectations and might have absolutely no desire to gain the approval or sexual favor of other women, higher level of testosterone still result in more risk taking, and like wise men who get exposed to the same social expectations as much as any other men will still be more risk averse if they have lower testosterone levels. This suggests a more direct relationship between risk taking and biology (Although sociological mechanisms can still be a factor).
    I think I've read this in paper form, but if you'd like I can try and find an online source.

    P.S.
    INTJ? Didn't you use to type as ENTP?

  2. #1112
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Who is this???
    The current president of the National Organization for Women, largest politically active self-declared feminist organization in the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Interesting that you mention using flowers to engage girls in electronics as an example. I see this as stereotyping: why are girls more likely to be interested in flowers than airplanes or robots? Why aren't boys interested in flowers? How about showing girls that airplanes and robots are fun, too - and showing boys all the interesting things about flowers? As a woman in science, it really ticks me off when people feel they have to sell or present things to female audiences with the equivalent of a big pink bow on it.
    I agree - I brought it up as an example because I came across a company that is actually trying to do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    For instance, the number of women getting undergrad and doctoral degrees in STEM fields has been steadily increasing, except in computer science.
    That is interesting.

    Maybe the rate of changing requirements?
    If you do it as a physicist, there might be new publications, new tools and testing methods they've found, but I imagine our fundamental understanding of the universe probably won't turn on it's head. Taking a long maternity leave from computer science could be a lot harder to recover from: A lot of the methods you are used too will be obsolete and inefficient, new tools and languages emerge, and in some cases entire coding languages get abandoned, network security methods at the time that you've left will be hacked by children by the time you'll return. I have seen this also happens to people who started as programmers, got moved into management and then tried going back to programming, or people who left the field altogether and then tried going back to it.

    That's just a first draft guess though, and there are reasons to think it might be wrong (Since it's a lot easier to work from home as a programmer). I'd be interested in what they find in investigating this.

  3. #1113
    Suave y Fuerte Array BadOctopus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    But... there might be contradicting evidence on this:
    If my memory's not failing me, I believe I've read a study that found a strong correlation between risky and risk-averse behaviors with different levels of testosterone between individuals of each gender.
    This suggests that even within women, who experience the feminine side of social expectations and might have absolutely no desire to gain the approval or sexual favor of other women, higher level of testosterone still result in more risk taking, and like wise men who get exposed to the same social expectations as much as any other men will still be more risk averse if they have lower testosterone levels. This suggests a more direct relationship between risk taking and biology (Although sociological mechanisms can still be a factor).
    I think I've read this in paper form, but if you'd like I can try and look for it.

    P.S.
    INTJ? Didn't you use to type as ENTP?
    I think I recall reading something similar, but I can't remember where. It sounds really familiar. If you could find it, I'd be interested in reading it, but don't feel obliged if it's too much trouble.

    And no, I've never typed as anything other than INTJ. You might be thinking of someone else. I would be such a lousy ENTP!
    WOOP WOOP WOOP

  4. #1114
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BadOctopus View Post
    I think I recall reading something similar, but I can't remember where. It sounds really familiar. If you could find it, I'd be interested in reading it, but don't feel obliged if it's too much trouble.

    And no, I've never typed as anything other than INTJ. You might be thinking of someone else. I would be such a lousy ENTP!
    I don't think this was the original study I've read, but similar results:

    The association between testosterone and economic risk is not well-understood and is understudied. The present study aimed to further characterize what if any relationship testosterone has with risky economic decisions. To do so, 154 participants (78 men) completed the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) (Bechara et al., 1994) and also provided saliva samples, which were assayed for endogenous testosterone levels using radioimmunoassay. High-levels of endogenous testosterone were associated with choosing less frequently from advantageous IGT decks of cards, indicating greater risk taking. The data showed that the effects of testosterone on IGT performance were similar for men and women. High-testosterone women and high-testosterone men made riskier choices than their low-testosterone counterparts of the same sex, and this effect was pronounced in women. Thus, high levels of testosterone are associated with willingness to incur greater risk in both sexes

    .
    But... I also found a study that reinforces what @Lateralus said, creating a chicken and the egg problem:
    The authors report a field experiment with skateboarders that demonstrates that physical risk taking by young men increases in the presence of an attractive female. This increased risk taking leads to more successes but also more crash landings in front of a female observer. Mediational analyses suggest that this increase in risk taking is caused in part by elevated testosterone levels of men who performed in front of the attractive female. In addition, skateboarders' risk taking was predicted by their performance on a reversal-learning task, reversal-learning performance was disrupted by the presence of the attractive female, and the female’s presence moderated the observed relationship between risk taking and reversal learning. These results suggest that men use physical risk taking as a sexual display strategy, and they provide suggestive evidence regarding possible hormonal and neural mechanisms.

    Also, looking online for the words "Testosterone" & "Risk" will teach you more about prostates then you've ever wanted to know... I've always thought I might one day get killed by an asshole, but not like that.

  5. #1115
    Happy Dancer Array uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    That is interesting.

    Maybe the rate of changing requirements?
    If you do it as a physicist, there might be new publications, new tools and testing methods they've found, but I imagine our fundamental understanding of the universe probably won't turn on it's head. Taking a long maternity leave from computer science could be a lot harder to recover from: A lot of the methods you are used too will be obsolete and inefficient, new tools and languages emerge, and in some cases entire coding languages get abandoned, network security methods at the time that you've left will be hacked by children by the time you'll return. I have seen this also happens to people who started as programmers, got moved into management and then tried going back to programming, or people who left the field altogether and then tried going back to it.

    That's just a first draft guess though, and there are reasons to think it might be wrong (Since it's a lot easier to work from home as a programmer). I'd be interested in what they find in investigating this.
    It was the subject of a very contentious thread from a year or two ago. The OP's thesis was that it was the overt sexism in the field.

    Why women shun IT?

    Others offered different hypotheses.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes Mane, Osprey liked this post

  6. #1116
    Alchemist of life Array Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Maybe the rate of changing requirements?
    If you do it as a physicist, there might be new publications, new tools and testing methods they've found, but I imagine our fundamental understanding of the universe probably won't turn on it's head. Taking a long maternity leave from computer science could be a lot harder to recover from: A lot of the methods you are used too will be obsolete and inefficient, new tools and languages emerge, and in some cases entire coding languages get abandoned, network security methods at the time that you've left will be hacked by children by the time you'll return. I have seen this also happens to people who started as programmers, got moved into management and then tried going back to programming, or people who left the field altogether and then tried going back to it.

    That's just a first draft guess though, and there are reasons to think it might be wrong (Since it's a lot easier to work from home as a programmer). I'd be interested in what they find in investigating this.
    If I do what as a physicist? If you mean maternity leaves, the need for this is reduced by the degree to which fathers take paternity leave. A natural childbirth without complications does not need a prolonged recovery period, and if there is a complication, well - that's a medical event like someone needing his appendix out or breaking a leg. It's just a sick leave event then. This is part of what I mean by women need to play to win. You can't take extended maternity leave and keep current in many fields. You CAN work a flexible schedule, include some telework, even work a part time schedule, and stay current. A woman in my organization had a baby several years ago. She was out a grand total of 2 weeks, after which she and her husband both worked part time for 6-8 months, to keep the child at home with them. Including telework time, she probably worked about a 70% schedule, and didn't miss a beat at work. She also claimed life felt alot more "normal", not having to be away from something that was a significant part of her life for an extended period. Of course this requires the complicity of a like-minded husband, but then that is a big part of my point.

    As for computer science, I have my own theory but have never been able to validate it. There was a sharp downturn in the numbers of women in CS in the mid to late '80's, which is when majors like management information systems started to become commonplace. I wonder whether women interested in this subject used to take CS when that was the only option, but given the new major, would enroll in that instead. This is an example of where a sharp decline does not correlate with some form of gender bias needing correction, but is simply an artifact of how universities choose to divide up their subjects. There have been small increases in women in CS since then; it was just the sudden drop that was anomalous and unexplained.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #1117
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    If I do what as a physicist? If you mean maternity leaves
    Sorry, yes. That's what I meant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Of course this requires the complicity of a like-minded husband, but then that is a big part of my point.
    In the last couple of days I've decided to look further into the MRM (Men's Right's Movement) the same way I did with feminism earlier, and interestingly enough, they have a very recent schizm on that very same issue (Recent as in the last few months) , within a larger context.

    I initially dismissed the MGTOW (Men Go Their Own Way) branch as an odd equivalent of the old lesbian separatist movement in feminism, and honestly I get the impression they don't really know what they are as a movement themselves yet. But, in looking into the MRM side of things I've read the MGTOW criticism about the MRA and why they are breaking off, and some of it might be relevant:
    Largely they accuse the MRM of been too divided between a progressives demanding the same privileges as women (Such as fathers who want more time with their children and equal paternal leave) and traditionalists wanting to regain their old privileges (Meaning stay at work dads & stay at home moms) to ever come together into legal activism. They claim they themselves belong to the first group and view traditionalism as harmful to men's right as much as feminism, one of the very few point that they agree with feminists, and frankly one of the few points in which I can very easily agree with both. The old system was horrible for everyone involved.

    I don't know if what they claim about the MRM is true, I did not see this in the outspoken figureheads, and it's not clear if the examples of traditionalists that they gave are extreme strawmen's or an integral part of the MRM's community itself. If this is true, then the MRM at it's current state is about as useless for men's rights as the feminists movement is when it claims the same.

    Whether this new branch has any chance of developing a movement that actually gives a f' and is willing to petition governments and municipalities in pursuit of equality... I don't know. There is a lot of BS narratives to cut through to really determine anything about these guys. If they are the real thing, they are going to need a better plan then unionizing their collective ball sacks.

    Regardless, this seems to at the very least show some good intentions:

  8. #1118
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Sorry, yes. That's what I meant.



    Interesting.

    In the last couple of days I've decided to look further into the MRM (Men's Right's Movement) the same way I did with feminism earlier, and interestingly enough, they have a very recent schizm on that very same issue (Recent as in the last few months) , within a larger context.


    I initially dismissed the MGTOW (Men Go Their Own Way) branch as an odd equivalent of the old lesbian separatist movement in feminism, and honestly I get the impression they don't really know what they are as a movement themselves yet. But, in doing so I've read their criticism about the MRM and why they are breaking off, and some of it might be poignant:
    Largely they accuse the MRM of been too divided between a progressives demanding the same privileges as women (Such as fathers who want more time with their children and equal paternal leave) and traditionalists wanting to regain their old privileges (Meaning stay at work dads & stay at home moms) to ever come together into legal activism. They claim they themselves belong to the first group and view traditionalism as harmful to men's right as much as feminism, one of the very few point that they agree with feminists, and frankly one of the few points in which I can very easily agree with both. The old system was horrible for everyone involved.
    Really you actually think think traditionalism was that bad? It's how our race survived for 3 million years personally I wouldn't call it horrible, just kind of outdated but our current system is even worse it's basically feminism on steroids with a lot of misandry mixed in if it wasn't so convoluted, hypocritical and sexist I would call myself a feminist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    I don't know if what they claim about the MRM is true, I did not see this in the outspoken figureheads, and it's not clear if the examples of traditionalists that they gave are extreme strawmen's or an integral part of the MRM's community itself. If this is true, then the MRM as it's current state is about as useless for men's rights as the feminists movement is when it claims the same.
    it's because no one really cares what men have to say even if their arguments are valid this is why many of the MRMs are also women because people actually listen to women. In society women gain power through outspoken behaviour and men gain power without acting. It is much more progressive for men to simply opt out of society than to convince others of their issues.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Whether this new branch has any chance of developing a movement that actually gives a f' and is willing to petition governments and municipalities in pursuit of equality... I don't know. There is a lot of BS narratives to cut through to really determine anything about these guys. If they are the real thing, they are going to need a better plan then unionizing their collective ball sacks.
    MGtow is a phenomenon whether you call it MGTOw or not, many MGTOWs don't even know what the word means or know there are similar men in their situation they are simply opting out of society due to how they are treated in general. THis is why I think phenomenon is a better word to describe MGTOW because it's happening everywhere.

  9. #1119
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Really you actually think think traditionalism was that bad? It's how our race survived for 3 million years
    I wouldn't lump "the old days" together like that: Throughout much of that time family life and work life weren't really separate environments. Most children worked in their parents professions together with their parents, mostly agriculture. That, and hunter gatherer society before that, are the systems that helped us survive.

    The "old system" I am talking about, the one I believe the traditionalists envision when they think of the 1950s or previous centuries, is the one that emerged with the industrial revolution, in which providing for the family meant spending most of your time away from your family. It has served us for a few centuries, sure. You could argue that we wouldn't have developed technologically & economically as much without it, we certainly wouldn't have had our current population without it, but I don't think it's true to say we wouldn't have survived.

    And yes, for the individuals within it, I think it was pretty horrible:
    I don't think it was good for children to grow up without having a relationship with their fathers.
    I don't think it was good for men to live their lives in the support of a family they barely get to see.
    I don't think it was good for women to not have personal agency in what they did with their lives.

    Feminism tried to fix the 3rd while neglecting the first two problems and in some ways making them worst.
    It's time we fix the first two.

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    MGtow is a phenomenon whether you call it MGTOw or not, many MGTOWs don't even know what the word means or know there are similar men in their situation they are simply opting out of society due to how they are treated in general. THis is why I think phenomenon is a better word to describe MGTOW because it's happening everywhere.
    Not getting married is a phenomena, but it's largely getting replaced by cohabitation, and increasingly more and more jurisdictions call these common law relationships and treat them as much of the same thing. Most men still want relationships, or as some of the MGTOW movement would call it, "Become slaves to women's approval". The MGTOW movement on the other hand seems to be preaching getting out of relationships and dating altogether, and some go as far as giving up on sex (Including the one who made the FathersFirst video).

    Anyway, I am not really concerned about MGTOW as a lifestyle choice, or their philosophy for that matter.
    What I want to know is what they can do as a political movement in actually progressing men's rights.
    Their criticism about the MRA is relevant, but what are they going to do that the MRA didn't?

  10. #1120
    Alchemist of life Array Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    In the last couple of days I've decided to look further into the MRM (Men's Right's Movement) the same way I did with feminism earlier, and interestingly enough, they have a very recent schizm on that very same issue (Recent as in the last few months) , within a larger context.

    I initially dismissed the MGTOW (Men Go Their Own Way) branch as an odd equivalent of the old lesbian separatist movement in feminism, and honestly I get the impression they don't really know what they are as a movement themselves yet. But, in looking into the MRM side of things I've read the MGTOW criticism about the MRA and why they are breaking off, and some of it might be relevant:
    Largely they accuse the MRM of been too divided between a progressives demanding the same privileges as women (Such as fathers who want more time with their children and equal paternal leave) and traditionalists wanting to regain their old privileges (Meaning stay at work dads & stay at home moms) to ever come together into legal activism. They claim they themselves belong to the first group and view traditionalism as harmful to men's right as much as feminism, one of the very few point that they agree with feminists, and frankly one of the few points in which I can very easily agree with both. The old system was horrible for everyone involved.
    If MGTOW means men really going "their own way", in other words, without women at all, that is a legitimate choice. There are plenty of women doing fine without men. On the other hand, if men want a family and are willing to invest time and effort in that, also good. What they don't get is to expect a woman to take care of their family and house while they go off and earn money. Sure, they can want that, and many are lucky enough to find women who truly want it as well. They have no entitlement to it, though. It is simple individual preference, and must be matched up with the right partner just like any other preferences.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •