Toxic Feminism

[Coriolis]

If it's about equality of opportunity, then it's good feminism. If it's about equality of outcome, it's discriminatory and it could be called toxic. Also, often it's motivated by resentment and playing the victim card.

I agree. Equality of opportunity is at the root of my personal definition of feminism, which is giving to women the same opportunity, rights, and responsibilities given to men. This helps men, too, since, for example, it rules out an all-male draft, or the presumption in family court that child custody should go to the mother by default.

We cannot ignore outcomes altogether. While it is wrong to enforce equal outcomes, it is instructive to examine unequal outcomes to learn how they arise. This can reveal systemic hurdles disproportionately affecting one group vs. another, hurdles that can then be removed. The claim that disparities of outcome are the result of personal choices has never been and cannot yet be tested, because the truly level playing field that would require does not exist. The underrepresentation of women in STEM fields, for instance, has been attributed to a relative lack of interest in these fields on the part of women. Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are underrepresented as well, yet no one makes the same argument about them. It is not a stretch to imagine that some of the barriers limiting participation of these groups affect women as well.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I think it's states like California that have the more fair divorce laws compared to more conservative states intent on "protecting families."

 

[MPP]

We cannot ignore outcomes altogether. While it is wrong to enforce equal outcomes, it is instructive to examine unequal outcomes to learn how they arise. This can reveal systemic hurdles disproportionately affecting one group vs. another, hurdles that can then be removed. The claim that disparities of outcome are the result of personal choices has never been and cannot yet be tested, because the truly level playing field that would require does not exist. The underrepresentation of women in STEM fields, for instance, has been attributed to a relative lack of interest in these fields on the part of women. Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are underrepresented as well, yet no one makes the same argument about them. It is not a stretch to imagine that some of the barriers limiting participation of these groups affect women as well.

The biggest psychological difference between men and women is interest. An interest in Things vs People. This also seems to be the case with certain species of monkey's. This also seems to be connected to trait agreeableness on the Big Five.

Why Do Boys and Girls Prefer Different Toys?

Why girls often like Barbies and boys often like trucks.

www.psychologytoday.com

Taking Sex Differences in Personality Seriously

New approaches are shedding light on the magnitude of sex differences in personality, and the results are so strong and pervasive that they can no longer be ignored

blogs.scientificamerican.com

In the counties that have gone to the most lengths to rule out negative stereotypes and discrimination have seen a larger divide between men and women when it comes to careers choices.

 

[MPP]

I think it's states like California that have the more fair divorce laws compared to more conservative states intent on "protecting families."

Families staying together should be encouraged. One of the strongest connections in the social sciences is that between the breakup of the family and crime. Particularly young men joining gangs, and girls going into prostitution.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Families staying together should be encouraged. One of the strongest connections in the social sciences is that between the breakup of the family and crime. Particularly young men joining gangs, and girls going into prostitution.

My main thing is that I think LGBTQ families should be encouraged as well. The pro-family people usuallly don't agree with that.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

More wage growth instead of trickle-down economics would allow for more single earner households for those who want it as well.

The economic necessity of the dual-earner household is interestingly something that never gets brought up.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

If you aren't willing to address the economic realities, however Marxist doing so might seem, anything else proposed is a pipe dream.

More people praying or going to church or whatever isn't going to do shit.

 

[JocktheMotie]

It isn't limited to them. We had a member here years ago, Salome - that was a really horrible person. She was an NT.

lol

I think she would probably be much mellower today. I think we were more alike than she might think. She said some things about me that pissed off but I think she's probably been through a lot of shit and I thought that even then.

I mean I was more aggro in those days, too. Mostly I've mellowed out and lately I've tried to avoid conversations that push me in the opposite direction.

I don't know if she would necessarily be more mellow. From personal experience it's hard to maintain the same kind of energy against the same bullshit after a while.

Salome was cool and funny and ...

Definitely on the Mt. Rushmore of forum INTPs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to "Feminism," I am generally for equality of the sexes. I don't think anyone serious thinks women should be "on top" (some do, sure, but any movement has their weirdos and they should be ignored).

I do think that most social power movements have strategy/implementation problems where there's a focus on top-down culture first solutions rather than bottom up practical problem solving that in turn end up filtering through to the culture, and feminism is no exception. I get that it's hard to simultaneously express how sexism has harmed women in a way that's truthful to the harmed, but not fundamentally alienating to the people you need in order to actually enact change.

I think that feminism, broadly, is a liberty-increasing force for the general population.

 

[Coriolis]

The biggest psychological difference between men and women is interest. An interest in Things vs People. This also seems to be the case with certain species of monkey's. This also seems to be connected to trait agreeableness on the Big Five.

Why Do Boys and Girls Prefer Different Toys?

Why girls often like Barbies and boys often like trucks.

www.psychologytoday.com

Taking Sex Differences in Personality Seriously

New approaches are shedding light on the magnitude of sex differences in personality, and the results are so strong and pervasive that they can no longer be ignored

blogs.scientificamerican.com

In the counties that have gone to the most lengths to rule out negative stereotypes and discrimination have seen a larger divide between men and women when it comes to careers choices.

That things/people distinction parallels the T/F dichotomy in typology systems. Statistically more women are F and more men are T, but the minorities expressing the opposite preference are significant. The majority preferences also mirror social conditioning to large extent, making it hard to separate the effects of nature and nurture. I have read studies like what you reference and find the conclusions rather simplistic, but don't have the time now to go into a more detailed analysis. I do know that the numbers of women and minorities entering professional schools increased sharply once barriers to their attendance were removed. In fact, many attended in the face of substantial informal pressure to take more traditional educational and career paths.

Families staying together should be encouraged. One of the strongest connections in the social sciences is that between the breakup of the family and crime. Particularly young men joining gangs, and girls going into prostitution.

Families are stronger and more likely to stay together when people choose a mate for the right reasons, and when there isn't a power imbalance in the relationship. "Wrong" reasons include social or family pressure, poor self-image, and economic hardship. People can make such relationships work for a time, but they often are imbalanced and lead to resentment and perpetuation of this cycle.

My main thing is that I think LGBTQ families should be encouraged as well. The pro-family people usuallly don't agree with that.

Exactly. So-called "pro-family" people are usually only "pro" the kinds of families that look like their own.

 

[MPP]

My main thing is that I think LGBTQ families should be encouraged as well. The pro-family people usuallly don't agree with that.

Generally, men and women have different attitudes to parenting. The Mothers general style is more on the compassionate side. They may say "you are good enough just the way you are". Fathers generally have a more constructive criticism style. They may say things like "you need to do better". This is connected to trait agreeableness on the big five. Women on average are higher in agreeableness, and it looks biological, not socially constructed.

There are studies suggesting children need a balance between these two approaches. Plus, the father is the one that keeps the boys in check when they reach their teenage years. The father is the dominant physical figure. Lack of a father figure is connected to crime rates. This is a very strong correlation in the social sciences.

So generally speaking, it looks like children will benefit more from a male and female parent. I'm not interested in ideologies or political correctness. Only the truth, and only what the best and current research suggests.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

So generally speaking, it looks like children will benefit more from a male and female parent. I'm not interested in ideologies or political correctness. Only the truth, and only what the best and current research suggests.

Somehow I doubt you're interested in what research says at all. It just seems more likely that you have your core beliefs and you don't want those challenged.

Anyway, I apologize but I've lost interest in this conversation. It's developing along familiar lines which is exhausting and boring to me. I'm not really interested in sussing out the root of your beliefs for confirmation of the above hypothesis.

 

[MPP]

Somehow I doubt you're interested in what research says at all. It just seems more likely that you have your core beliefs and you don't want those challenged.

Anyway, I apologize but I've lost interest in this conversation. It's developing along familiar lines which is exhausting and boring to me. I'm not really interested in sussing out the root of your beliefs for confirmation of the above hypothesis.

You don't want to continue it because the recent research supports what I say. Truth should influence belief, not the other way around.

 

[MPP]

I do know that the numbers of women and minorities entering professional schools increased sharply once barriers to their attendance were removed. In fact, many attended in the face of substantial informal pressure to take more traditional educational and career paths.

Families are stronger and more likely to stay together when people choose a mate for the right reasons, and when there isn't a power imbalance in the relationship. "Wrong" reasons include social or family pressure, poor self-image, and economic hardship. People can make such relationships work for a time, but they often are imbalanced and lead to resentment and perpetuation of this cycle.

Exactly. So-called "pro-family" people are usually only "pro" the kinds of families that look like their own.

Yes, if you remove or reduce learned behaviours and traditions/barriers you will be left with biological differences. In Scandinavian countries where they have made the most progress with this, the divide between men going into the stem fields, and engineering, and women going into caring roles has increased. This suggests it's more nature, not nurture. It also makes logical sense that females are naturally more caring. This is the same with most animals.

Marriage is now more about status, and social pressure. This is because the Christian moral aspect is gone. All that is left is the shallow reasons for marriage, the words at the alter have no meaning, are not taken seriously. Plus, most people don't know themselves, they have no idea what they want, are misled by popular views, and are nihilistic.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm not sure why you are glorifying Christianity. I spent close to 40 years in that subculture and they're as screwed up as anyone else you're criticizing, they just try very hard to slap a pretty veneer over it so no one notices. It makes it difficult to seriously entertain your ideas.

 

[Red Herring]

Yes, if you remove or reduce learned behaviours and traditions/barriers you will be left with biological differences. In Scandinavian countries where they have made the most progress with this, the divide between men going into the stem fields, and engineering, and women going into caring roles has increased. This suggests it's more nature, not nurture. It also makes logical sense that females are naturally more caring. This is the same with most animals.

Marriage is now more about status, and social pressure. This is because the Christian moral aspect is gone. All that is left is the shallow reasons for marriage, the words at the alter have no meaning, are not taken seriously. Plus, most people don't know themselves, they have no idea what they want, are misled by popular views, and are nihilistic.

That's not really true though...

We Dug Into Data to Disprove a Myth About Women in STEM

 

[ceecee]

Yes, if you remove or reduce learned behaviours and traditions/barriers you will be left with biological differences. In Scandinavian countries where they have made the most progress with this, the divide between men going into the stem fields, and engineering, and women going into caring roles has increased. This suggests it's more nature, not nurture. It also makes logical sense that females are naturally more caring. This is the same with most animals.

Marriage is now more about status, and social pressure. This is because the Christian moral aspect is gone. All that is left is the shallow reasons for marriage, the words at the alter have no meaning, are not taken seriously. Plus, most people don't know themselves, they have no idea what they want, are misled by popular views, and are nihilistic.

Tell me you have a massive problem finding a partner without telling me you have a massive problem finding a partner.

 

[Tomb1]

Generally, men and women have different attitudes to parenting. The Mothers general style is more on the compassionate side. They may say "you are good enough just the way you are". Fathers generally have a more constructive criticism style. They may say things like "you need to do better". This is connected to trait agreeableness on the big five. Women on average are higher in agreeableness, and it looks biological, not socially constructed.

There are studies suggesting children need a balance between these two approaches. Plus, the father is the one that keeps the boys in check when they reach their teenage years. The father is the dominant physical figure. Lack of a father figure is connected to crime rates. This is a very strong correlation in the social sciences.

So generally speaking, it looks like children will benefit more from a male and female parent. I'm not interested in ideologies or political correctness. Only the truth, and only what the best and current research suggests.

Yeah, those studies have gotten it all wrong, mainly due to reliance upon the self-reporting of low iq thugs who've been conditioned by jailhouse shrinks to blame everything on their fatherless childhood.

But you will remember that the overwhelming mafioso from 1920s-Present day all had father figures....Italians, Jews, Irish. Drug Cartels, same....Mexico, South America. El Mencho had a father. Even the super criminal Pablo Escobar:

"The world’s greatest outlaw and cocaine trafficker was born to Abel de Jesus Escobar Echeverri, a simple farmer. Able was married to Hermilda Gaviria. The couple was blessed with seven kids, out of which Pablo was the third one. Pablo’s mother Hermilda Gaviria was an elementary school teacher."

Pablo Escobar Family – Family Tree

If you are talking about the world’s greatest outlaw and cocaine traffickers, then Pablo Escobar will top the list. Born on the December 1, 1949 in Antioquia, Colombia, Escobar was regarded as the r...

www.celebfamily.com

See, nice happy family little Pablo grew up with.

Gangs are in business to make money through control over supply and demand....Markets operate too efficently to exercise that degree of control....buying wholesale you might be entitled to a 20 percent markup retailing inventory, and then competitors and inflation and everything else.

the criminal enterprise flips that upside down so that free market principles are at its mercy....easy to move inventory and quadruple profits when that inventory "fell off the back of the truck"

Another fun fact...crime only becomes crime after the fact of its existence, when legislators see what was going on and decide to pass a law to stop it....like Moonshinin' business. So guys are moonshinin' and the government finds out, says they don't like it, passes a law to outlaw it, and now those who are moonshinin' are criminals and social scientists come along and say this crime is related to Johnny's lack of approval from his distant chemist dad. but at one time it was just some guys making a buck off selling some moonshine and nothing more.

So yeah, so much for what you call the best and current research.

 

[Coriolis]

Yes, if you remove or reduce learned behaviours and traditions/barriers you will be left with biological differences. In Scandinavian countries where they have made the most progress with this, the divide between men going into the stem fields, and engineering, and women going into caring roles has increased. This suggests it's more nature, not nurture. It also makes logical sense that females are naturally more caring. This is the same with most animals.

Marriage is now more about status, and social pressure. This is because the Christian moral aspect is gone. All that is left is the shallow reasons for marriage, the words at the alter have no meaning, are not taken seriously. Plus, most people don't know themselves, they have no idea what they want, are misled by popular views, and are nihilistic.

Even in more progressive countries, the effects of social expectation can be significant. Thanks to @Red Herring for providing one of the analyses that debunk this claim. If these differences were truly based in biology, then we would have to accept that blacks, latinos, and native Americans have less innate interest in STEM fields also.

As for marriage, your views suggest that marriages in non-Christian cultures and traditions are inherently shallow. That is a bit presumptuous, and dismisses the majority of marriages and families in the world today and generations past. Now that women are not forced to marry for economic reasons, and barriers related to race and now gender are being lifted, people can marry someone they are truly compatible with, and prepared to share themselves fully with.

Generally, men and women have different attitudes to parenting. The Mothers general style is more on the compassionate side. They may say "you are good enough just the way you are". Fathers generally have a more constructive criticism style. They may say things like "you need to do better". This is connected to trait agreeableness on the big five. Women on average are higher in agreeableness, and it looks biological, not socially constructed.

There are studies suggesting children need a balance between these two approaches. Plus, the father is the one that keeps the boys in check when they reach their teenage years. The father is the dominant physical figure. Lack of a father figure is connected to crime rates. This is a very strong correlation in the social sciences.

So generally speaking, it looks like children will benefit more from a male and female parent. I'm not interested in ideologies or political correctness. Only the truth, and only what the best and current research suggests.

Generalizations about what men and women are overshadowed by individual differences. A given child will not be parented by a statistic, but by specific parents who may differ significantly from these generalized attitudes. The important part is that they get both compassion and constructive critique at home from adults who love and care about them. Yes, children benefit from having two parents, because parenting is a demanding job and it is very difficult for one person, male or female, to do everything alone. The parent doesn't have time to give the children the attention they need, and their stress levels affect the whole family. So the issue isn't gender, but number. Two same-sex parents, or even one parent and another live-in adult like an aunt or grandparent will provide more support for a child than a single parent.

 

[MPP]

I'm not sure why you are glorifying Christianity. I spent close to 40 years in that subculture and they're as screwed up as anyone else you're criticizing, they just try very hard to slap a pretty veneer over it so no one notices. It makes it difficult to seriously entertain your ideas.

Saying that Christianity is connected to giving some people a sense of morality is not glorifying it. There are good and bad things about Christianity, and religions in general. I'm not religious, I don't need a religion to be a moral person. However, that doesn't mean that others don't need it. The direction that western society is going in is evidence of that. You remove cultural programming, and what remains is biological instinct. Impulsive pleasure seeking and meaninglessness. Is that better? Maybe a balance is needed.

 

[yeghor]

Saying that Christianity is connected to giving some people a sense of morality is not glorifying it. There are good and bad things about Christianity, and religions in general. I'm not religious, I don't need a religion to be a moral person. However, that doesn't mean that others don't need it. The direction that western society is going in is evidence of that. You remove cultural programming, and what remains is biological instinct. Impulsive pleasure seeking and meaninglessness. Is that better? Maybe a balance is needed.

Impulsivity (Se or Ne) tempered by parental conditioning turn into self-control (Si or Ni), respectively. I think religion might serve to reinforce and maintain the conditioning once parental supervision is removed.

"God" serves as the omnipresent parental figure supervising the individual for bad behaviour.