User Tag List

Page 82 of 162 FirstFirst ... 3272808182838492132 ... LastLast
Results 811 to 820 of 1614

Thread: 3rd wave feminism

  1. #811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Men are generally nice to me, too. They are direct, take me seriously, understand me, and treat me with respect. Women play more games. They can be frustratingly indirect, sometimes manipulative, overly familiar, and I often feel we are speaking different languages.
    Amen!

    I wouldn't consider any of this abusive, but it isn't very pleasant.
    Yes.
    Last edited by LonestarCowgirl; 04-13-2015 at 05:10 AM. Reason: for accuracy.

  2. #812
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot Array SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Primary/sole breadwinners can easily lose their jobs, not to mention become disabled, die, or simply leave their families. As we saw during the recent economic downturn, men lost their jobs sooner and in greater numbers than women. Families were women were unable to pick up the slack no doubt did worse than those where they could.
    This is the reason why tradcons should move from the traditional division of labor to the dual earner model. When something bad happens to the sole earner the whole family is screwed. Is it any wonder that when a man in a traditional family unit (provisioner) loses his job he often finds himself grappling with marital problems that can/does lead up to divorce with all the incumbent problems that come with that. Including mental health issues like depression, suicide etc.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #813
    Lex Parsimoniae Array Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    This is the reason why tradcons should move from the traditional division of labor to the dual earner model. When something bad happens to the sole earner the whole family is screwed. Is it any wonder that when a man in a traditional family unit (provisioner) loses his job he often finds himself grappling with marital problems that can/does lead up to divorce with all the incumbent problems that come with that. Including mental health issues like depression, suicide etc.
    And now I'm going full circle.

    This is what killed the family. We all work fairly long hours and with both parents out if the house for so long, focused on something other than the family... What we knew as family is dying off. It's so easy to get wrapped up in work and forget things or not have enough time for your children because you're tired or have seventeen things to do in 5 minutes.

    We've sped life up so much and made everything "efficient" that the soul is going out of life. Sure we now have seventy three billion types of rose, but we only have time to smell four before we die.

    I agree that men and women should contribute to the income of the house so both have pride and purpose equally. However I fear that supporting having both parents work rushes us towards two full time careers and does ruin the family.

    I think we should try, where we can, to take back our time and our lives. We often talk about freedom and who died for what and who's written down this great speech about freedom but we're only really free for two days a week. Two days out of seven to see to everything that doesn't progress a businesses interests.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?
    Likes SpankyMcFly liked this post

  4. #814
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Performance is related to education and experience.
    What I meant to say was that performance equates to rewards. The better the performer one is, the more benefits and perks they should reap. So for example, if a man can close more sales, then by definition, they should make more money. If a woman close more sales, then of course, the female should make more money than the male. It's all about working hard. Think about school. Should math teachers simply lower the standards to accommodate females if female students perform inferior to males? I think not in the same way that I think English teachers should not lower standards for males when it comes to writing or creative writing or something like that.

    My friend's daughter interned with a Japanese company, for awhile in the U.S., and for awhile in Japan. She noticed that female interns were given far more responsibility in the U.S. office. In Japan, they mostly fetched coffee and answered the phone. This will not improve their performance and make them ready to take on more responsibility. This tracks all the way back to elementary school, the opportunities girls and boys are encouraged to take, and the examples presented to them. It is one reason my main volunteer activity is educational outreach.
    If memory serves me correctly, if human resources offers you a job, you have the right to accept or reject, at least here in the US. I am not Japanese so I can't really comment about Japan. Just think about why some college graduates accept their positions at Starbucks maybe because they can't get any other position elsewhere and they need to survive somehow. The choice is yours. You either accept or don't. Nobody is forcing you. If you don't accept, good luck competing with other people say like in the Silicon Valley or something like that where they receive hundreds if not thousands of applications. I mean, I suppose people like Andi Dorfman would be kidding herself if she thinks she is going to be able to get a position at the District Attorney's office in New York City. This isn't because she is simply just a woman, but just that there are other "better" qualified candidates than her.

    As for men doing certain things better than women can, there are certain things women can do better than a man. When evaluating an individual for a specific job, however, this is all irrelevant. Individuals are not statistics, and should be judged based on the reality of their abilities.
    Interesting point. If memory serves me correctly, at least here in the US, qualifications are based on performance and not necessarily abilities. For example, a person can have a degree in business administration but if someone with just a high school diploma is able to close more sales and therefore make more money for the company than the college graduate, then the better performer will likely get promoted.
    Likes N/A liked this post

  5. #815
    climb on Array Showbread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so/sp
    Posts
    2,315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    What I meant to say was that performance equates to rewards. The better the performer one is, the more benefits and perks they should reap. So for example, if a man can close more sales, then by definition, they should make more money. If a woman close more sales, then of course, the female should make more money than the male. It's all about working hard. Think about school. Should math teachers simply lower the standards to accommodate females if female students perform inferior to males? I think not in the same way that I think English teachers should not lower standards for males when it comes to writing or creative writing or something like that.
    Fun fact, research indicates that women actually do worse on tests when they are reminded that men are generally better at math. The actual difference in mathematical abilities that can be attributed to gender is very small. Women are often told they are just going to be worse at math, so they don't try as hard.

    I mean, I suppose people like Andi Dorfman would be kidding herself if she thinks she is going to be able to get a position at the District Attorney's office in New York City. This isn't because she is simply just a woman, but just that there are other "better" qualified candidates than her.
    I have no idea who Andi Dorfman is, but I would like to point something out. There are a lot of women who aren't getting job, or are being paid less for jobs because they are perceived as being less qualified because they are women. This goes back to the math thing, women are perceived as being worse at math, and often not taken seriously in engineering or math fields. Yes, ultimately I think the most qualified person should receive the job. However, women often already have points against them in that department because of stereotypes.
    Friends, waffles, work

    "The problem is, when you depend on a substitute for love, you can never get enough" - Louis Cozolino

    3w2 6w7 1w2
    *Gryffindor*

    Likes Ivy liked this post

  6. #816
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Showbread View Post
    Fun fact, research indicates that women actually do worse on tests when they are reminded that men are generally better at math. The actual difference in mathematical abilities that can be attributed to gender is very small. Women are often told they are just going to be worse at math, so they don't try as hard.
    Can you please provide links?

    And I have to disagree that women are often told they wouldn't do well in math. No teacher that teaches K-12 is going to tell their female students they suck in math. In fact, I think a lot of math teachers have positive intentions and wants everyone to do well. If memory serves me correctly, I understand your point, I mean, think about race. Even when Blacks weren't told they were not going to do well, while there was improvement, they still performed inferior to their White counterparts.

    Think about IQ scores too. I am pretty sure that no teacher or professor is going to tell or even remotely imply that their female students will perform poorly on IQ tests. Yet, look up the people with the top IQ scores in the world. They tend to be men:

    10 people with the highest IQ in the world (Infographic) | ScienceDump

    Are you suggesting that we somehow create another IQ test for women only? Wouldn't that only create more discrimination (talking to myself with questions not asking directly)?

    I have no idea who Andi Dorfman is, but I would like to point something out. There are a lot of women who aren't getting job, or are being paid less for jobs because they are perceived as being less qualified because they are women.
    I don't agree that it is about perception. The bottom line is that very few women are just as capable as men are and so this is why you don't really see that many women but if you might have noticed, there are definitely women in governmental offices, female managers at retail stores, etc.

    This goes back to the math thing, women are perceived as being worse at math, and often not taken seriously in engineering or math fields. Yes, ultimately I think the most qualified person should receive the job. However, women often already have points against them in that department because of stereotypes.
    Actually, I think a lot of hiring managers try the best to their abilities to judge who is most qualified. And if it happens to be mostly men, then it is the male that is superior. If it happens to be mostly women, then it is the women. Just think about why a lot of nurses (RNs) tend to be women. I think it is because they seem most appropriate and qualified, given the fact that research shows it is mostly ESFJs that are nurses. And nurses make a pretty decent amount of money too, at least in my opinion. So there is no discrimination, just based on I suppose what one could call natural determinism.

  7. #817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Your tiny dic is not loading.

  8. #818
    Analytical Dreamer Array Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    This is what killed the family. We all work fairly long hours and with both parents out if the house for so long, focused on something other than the family... What we knew as family is dying off. It's so easy to get wrapped up in work and forget things or not have enough time for your children because you're tired or have seventeen things to do in 5 minutes.
    You are idealizing a scenario that for most of humanity at most times has never existed. The Ward and June Cleaver lifestyle, where one parent devotes him/herself to work, and the other has ample time to spend with children existed for some decades of the 20th century. Other than that, both parents in poor families worked long and hard, and the wealthy often had nannies or governesses raising their kids. In the industrial age, women worked in factories as well as men, with older children or elders watching kids. Or women did piecework at home with any children who were able. On the agricultural side, the farmer's wife had as much to do as he did. Same with the ordinary housewife too poor to hire help. Sure, these women were in the house all day, but the amount of hard, often physical labor required just to keep up with laundry, mending, cleaning, cooking and nearly daily shopping in the era before modern refrigeration left little time for the kinds of interactions we expect of stay at home parents today.

    I wouldn't put down two-career families so quickly. Depending on what their kids are doing while they are at work, they may be better off than their counterparts 100 years ago in a more traditional arrangement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    I think we should try, where we can, to take back our time and our lives. We often talk about freedom and who died for what and who's written down this great speech about freedom but we're only really free for two days a week. Two days out of seven to see to everything that doesn't progress a businesses interests.
    This much is true. The modern conveniences that gave 50's housewives the time to spend with their children should not be used just to free up time for more (business and professional) work. On the other hand, if you have a good job that pays you to do something you find enjoyable and fulfilling, you can count most of your work hours as part of your freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    If memory serves me correctly, if human resources offers you a job, you have the right to accept or reject, at least here in the US. I am not Japanese so I can't really comment about Japan. Just think about why some college graduates accept their positions at Starbucks maybe because they can't get any other position elsewhere and they need to survive somehow. The choice is yours. You either accept or don't. Nobody is forcing you. If you don't accept, good luck competing with other people say like in the Silicon Valley or something like that where they receive hundreds if not thousands of applications.
    Are you suggesting that women should be satisfied with the options of taking a job in a sexist environment, or remaining unemployed? In any case, the job I specified was an internship, which means it was supposed to be a learning opportunity for someone just starting out in the industry. Students don't take these jobs (just) for the pay, but to gain experience and make connections. The Japanese office was paying these women (perhaps the same as the men?), but not demanding the return of meaningful work, and not training them to contribute more to the company in future.

    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    Interesting point. If memory serves me correctly, at least here in the US, qualifications are based on performance and not necessarily abilities. For example, a person can have a degree in business administration but if someone with just a high school diploma is able to close more sales and therefore make more money for the company than the college graduate, then the better performer will likely get promoted.
    That used to be the case, and may still be in some occupations, but we have become a credential-happy society. In many occupations, you can't even get your foot in the door without the right degrees and certifications. For instance, computer administration is a small part of my job, and I have been doing it for over a decade. Even in my existing job, however, I would have been relieved of that duty a couple of years ago if I didn't go out and get an official industry certification. In most schools, it doesn't matter how well you can actually teach, you need the right degree and state licensing. Yes, it would be better if employers were more goal-oriented, and more willing to make and support judgments about employee performance rather than abdicate that to supposedly objective measures like these certifications, numbers of "continuous learning points", etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    I don't agree that it is about perception. The bottom line is that very few women are just as capable as men are and so this is why you don't really see that many women but if you might have noticed, there are definitely women in governmental offices, female managers at retail stores, etc.
    Now it is your turn to provide a reference, or at least some sound reasoning as to why this might be. It is quite a broad generalization.
    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...
    Likes Ivy liked this post

  9. #819
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    The Japanese office was paying these women (perhaps the same as the men?), but not demanding the return of meaningful work, and not training them to contribute more to the company in future.
    That's just funny. All I have to say.

    That used to be the case, and may still be in some occupations, but we have become a credential-happy society. In many occupations, you can't even get your foot in the door without the right degrees and certifications. For instance, computer administration is a small part of my job, and I have been doing it for over a decade. Even in my existing job, however, I would have been relieved of that duty a couple of years ago if I didn't go out and get an official industry certification. In most schools, it doesn't matter how well you can actually teach, you need the right degree and state licensing. Yes, it would be better if employers were more goal-oriented, and more willing to make and support judgments about employee performance rather than abdicate that to supposedly objective measures like these certifications, numbers of "continuous learning points", etc.
    ....there's experience, personality, etc. Some women just don't have the kind of "desired" personality in certain jobs that only a man can have and vice versa with women. Hence, I talked about nursing earlier.

    Now it is your turn to provide a reference, or at least some sound reasoning as to why this might be. It is quite a broad generalization.
    It's called performance, character, personality, and ultimately qualification.

  10. #820
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot Array SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Your tiny dic is not loading.
    What is this, junior highschool?

    Maybe you could present an argument or make a point?
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft
    Likes Rasofy liked this post

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
  •