What is the hardest thing about being a woman?

[Abcdenfp]

A major one is being judged by how you look. And there's no winning. You're too much something... too short, too tall, too thin, too fat, too feminine, too unfeminine, too madeup, too little makeup. And the message society sends that love and desire heavily depend on these looks, with little emphasis on other things, like character.

this..all the feels.

 

[Luminous]

To me that's a dangerously cynical and overly-rationalised view of other human beings. I'm curious to know who is doing the boiling down and why? If someone has expressed this to you and made you feel as if this were true about yourself or others I can only extend my sympathy, but also the advice that anyone advocating such a view is most likely a somewhat pathological individual who has decided on a settled version of reality, is probably being deliberately disingenuous, and is perhaps best avoided and if not, then whose opinions likely require challenging.

If this is to imply that it is a majority (and therefore commonly held) position in society however...I'm not sure I can agree. At least no more than men can be boiled down to receptacles of physical labour & expendable war attrition whose only importance is that they take the most dangerous tasks in order to protect the agents who produce newly formed humans and who, by 40, are essentially crippled both physically and emotionally and are now worthless, limping on as an economic tap until they die.

It's more the latter paragraph, though I don't mean to imply it is a majority opinion in society. It is, however, a pervasive attitude in Western entertainment, which does have a large influence over societal attitudes. I'm not implying people don't apply critical thinking, but this, along with the issue of physical attractiveness in general, are issues that females in the Western world have to deal with. I have in mind many casting calls I've read, shared by a friend in the industry, which I cannot share, unfortunately, as they are copyrighted. And yeah, I think entertainment boils men down too, but in different ways.

 

[Patches]

Writes creepy rep to Patches.

Creepers on the internet have never and will never change

 

[Lark]

Creepers on the internet have never and will never change

Hope you dont think I'm creepy really Patches, I've no designs on anyone on the forum besides maybe friendship.

 

[Yuurei]

Not being able to vent on a thread for venting about women problems without 60% of the content being men tryna argue/correct you.

 

[Lark]

I think there's a load of things which make it hard to be a woman, there's no way in hell I'd want to trade my life as a man for a life as a woman, that's a sort of a litmus test for me when I hear anyone bitch and moan about "[fill in the gap] has it so good", would you trade places with them and generally its a big No, Sir.

Its a man's world but it would be nothing without women.

 

[Coriolis]

Do I really need to point out that they are?

Go right ahead if you like. You have the right to be wrong.

It's a product of programming, alright. But it isn't social programming...

Gender equality paradox: fewer women in developed nations go after STEM degrees | Big Think

How long did people know that smoking causes cancer, before large numbers of people started to quit, or not to start to being with? Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are significantly underrepresented in STEM fields just as women are. Care to venture a guess as to what "non social" programming is responsible for this? It is extremely hard to counteract the effects of social and cultural programming on any group. It is happening, though, which is why the number of women (and minorities) in STEM fields is significantly higher than it was several decades ago.

 

[anticlimatic]

Go right ahead if you like. You have the right to be wrong.

1. What are we made of?

How long did people know that smoking causes cancer, before large numbers of people started to quit, or not to start to being with? Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are significantly underrepresented in STEM fields just as women are. Care to venture a guess as to what "non social" programming is responsible for this? It is extremely hard to counteract the effects of social and cultural programming on any group. It is happening, though, which is why the number of women (and minorities) in STEM fields is significantly higher than it was several decades ago.

The gender equality paradox goes well beyond STEM:

Alice Eagly, Wendy Wood and Mary Johannesen-Schmidt, among the most persuasive advocates for the primacy of socialisation into sex roles, predicted that increasing gender equality would lead to “the demise of many sex differences”. That prediction seems so intuitive, so consistent with contemporary thinking about gender equity, that it hardly needs testing. But Schmitt didn’t think so. He recognized that not only should the idea be put to the test, but that there exists a wealth of data on cross-cultural on variation in personality, behavioral and other traits that could be matched with good measures of gender equity and sex role ideology.

Counter to the prediction of social role theory, in only 2 out of 28 traits examined by Schmitt did sex differences narrow as gender equity increased. In six traits, the sex difference remained stable, and in 20 traits it widened.

For example, women tend to score higher than men on personality tests for extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness. Gender equity tends to elevate all three of these traits, but it does so more in women, widening the average sex difference.

Likewise, men score higher than women for the “Dark Triad” traits of Machiavellianism, Narcissism and Psychopathy. Gender equity has the salutary effect of reducing each of these three rather nasty traits, but it does so more for women than for men, resulting in wider sex differences.

I assume as a progressive you know how progression works. As gender equity rises, differences between the sexes rise with it. They aren't stalled by tradition or archaic social inertia. They are rising in response to it. Why do you think that is? It's because a level playing field magnifies the inherit biological differences between men and women- their "non social programming"- and liberates them to act, genuinely, from those distinctive strengths- without the more necessary gender similarities involved in societies in which survival is more of a factor.

 

[Firebird 8118]

Oh goodness, where to begin...

Unwanted attention, like getting creepy looks on the train by random strangers or being groped in public (this actually happened to me once when I was 11).

Oh, and unsolicited d*** pics.

 

[Deprecator]

Oh, and unsolicited d*** pics.

Do women ever seriously solicit guys for d*** pics? I've always thought that was just an urban myth, and to such an extent that whenever I've been asked, I always thought they were just joking or otherwise mocking men for their notorious propensity for making similar requests.

 

[Firebird 8118]

Do women ever seriously solicit guys for d*** pics? I've always thought that was just an urban myth, and to such an extent that whenever I've been asked, I always thought they were just joking or otherwise mocking men for their notorious propensity for making similar requests.

Lol I dunno about that as far as I know, the vast majority of us don't want to see them. Period.

 

[Deprecator]

as far as I know, the vast majority of us don't want to see them. Period.

Yeah, for the longest time this is what I've always thought as well, and considering the events which recently forced me to reconsider this notion, I'm now very glad that you've taken the time to set the record straight regarding the preferences of most other women.

Now I can safely say that they were ether A) not being remotely serious or B) even if they were being serious (again, highly unlikely), then they'd still be such an extremely atypical outlier that they'd best be avoided in general.

In other words, I made the right choice.

 

[Firebird 8118]

Yeah, for the longest time this is what I've always thought as well, and considering the events which recently forced me to reconsider this notion, I'm now very glad that you've taken the time to set the record straight regarding the preferences of most other women.

Now I can safely say that they were ether A) not being remotely serious or B) even if they were being serious (again, highly unlikely), then they'd still be such an extremely atypical outlier that they'd best be avoided in general.

In other words, I made the right choice.

Yep, no problem!

 

[Coriolis]

The gender equality paradox goes well beyond STEM:

I assume as a progressive you know how progression works. As gender equity rises, differences between the sexes rise with it. They aren't stalled by tradition or archaic social inertia. They are rising in response to it. Why do you think that is? It's because a level playing field magnifies the inherit biological differences between men and women- their "non social programming"- and liberates them to act, genuinely, from those distinctive strengths- without the more necessary gender similarities involved in societies in which survival is more of a factor.

Actually, the reverse has been the case. As the artificial limitations are removed, we see how similar men and women really are. I suppose against that backdrop the real differences do stand out more, like the proverbial sore thumb, but contrast doesn't imply significance, only visibility. I see you cannot address the fact that similar disparities in STEM and other areas exist for various racial/ethnic groups. That is more telling, as the same kinds of social and cultural factors affect them as affect women.

 

[anticlimatic]

Actually, the reverse has been the case.

Where? Coriolis Land?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijop.12265

Men's and women's personalities appear to differ in several respects. Social role theories of development assume gender differences result primarily from perceived gender roles, gender socialization and sociostructural power differentials. As a consequence, social role theorists expect gender differences in personality to be smaller in cultures with more gender egalitarianism. Several large cross‐cultural studies have generated sufficient data for evaluating these global personality predictions. Empirically, evidence suggests gender differences in most aspects of personality—Big Five traits, Dark Triad traits, self‐esteem, subjective well‐being, depression and values—are conspicuously larger in cultures with more egalitarian gender roles, gender socialization and sociopolitical gender equity. Similar patterns are evident when examining objectively measured attributes such as tested cognitive abilities and physical traits such as height and blood pressure. Social role theory appears inadequate for explaining some of the observed cultural variations in men's and women's personalities. Evolutionary theories regarding ecologically‐evoked gender differences are described that may prove more useful in explaining global variation in human personality.

contrast doesn't imply significance, only visibility.

100% crap.

I see you cannot address the fact that similar disparities in STEM and other areas exist for various racial/ethnic groups. That is more telling, as the same kinds of social and cultural factors affect them as affect women.

I don't believe in, or do, group identity politics, so that's one reason I'm not addressing it. Another is that I prefer to stick to one point, in one context (in this case gender differences and their root causes), which you should well be prepared for when discussing contentious points with me. Then again, you don't seem to believe that human beings are comprised of atoms, or that data collected across a proverbial mountain of research is valid, so I don't think we're approaching this with the same style of science.

 

[Betty Blue]

Dealing with sexism and misogyny, so vast a field it's impossible to detail. But it's the small things everyday that mount up. What may to a man be close to imperceptible is fairly obvious to most women.

 

[Coriolis]

Where? Coriolis Land?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijop.12265

I have addressed this before. Next.

100% crap.

The "crap" lies in assuming A implies B when it clearly does not. You know better than this (granted, an assumption, but one that it seems fair to make).

I don't believe in, or do, group identity politics, so that's one reason I'm not addressing it. Another is that I prefer to stick to one point, in one context (in this case gender differences and their root causes), which you should well be prepared for when discussing contentious points with me. Then again, you don't seem to believe that human beings are comprised of atoms, or that data collected across a proverbial mountain of research is valid, so I don't think we're approaching this with the same style of science.

Ah, yes - the excuses people make when they cannot actually answer the question or rebut the argument. You should be well prepared to be called out on this when discussing contentious points with me. Dismissing potentially related observations out of hand and confusing politics with science as you are doing are sloppy, lazy tactics that reflect willful ignorance.

I can understand if you don't have time or interest in pursuing the discussion further, but if so, best just to leave it there. We have both made our points, which are posted now for anyone interested in seeing both sides.

 

[Chad of the OttomanEmpire]

You know, I used to be glad I was a girl. I liked it. I failed to see how it was a problem.

And then over the last few years, I've slowly come to resent it and have actually considered undergoing a sex change. Pretty much every horrifying thing in life has happened to me because I'm female.

- I got attacked by thyroid disease, which typically tends to happen to women. I likely wouldn't have gotten sick at all if I were male.

- The doctors laughed me out of the office when I tried to get help for it, telling me I was "being hysterical" and "it's all in your head, honey". Questioning my intelligence when I disputed this. I know there's such a thing as medical paternalism which can affect both sexes, but I strongly suspect that this wouldn't have happened if I were male. I spent the next 3 years ill and unwilling to get it treated by a doctor. If only someone could have taken me seriously!

- NEVER having anyone listen to me or respect me when I tried to teach. I'm pretty sure if I were male, I wouldn't have had the discipline problems I did.

- ALWAYS being put in charge of small children despite the fact that I HATE children and don't know how to manage them. Ah but I'm a female. I'm NURTURING. Ha ha.

- ALWAYS being targeted and expected to give "charitable donations" to beggars, because women are more compassionate than men.

- Resentments against being perceived as an "easy western woman"...which automatically seals off any potential sexual encounter I might have entertained. Men constantly assuming that the way into my heart is to be romancey and floral and making sentimental statements about marriage and babies ew ew ew ew EW when I know they're just looking for a green card (I also concede, I think there are parallels with men in this case, but just, ew, the terms).

- Having my old laptop stolen because I'm physically weaker and therefore couldn't fight them off when they attacked me.

- Having my inheritance stolen from me in inequitable courtroom disputes, because I'm a woman and therefore am "going to get married one day" so that guy claiming to be my brother might as well take my share.

- Being constantly referred to lawyers because they're girls and I'm a girl and so therefore that's the best criterion for referring me to them. Not costs or expertise, nope. And that's how I lost the case.

- Constantly being treated like I don't understand the bottom line in negotiations and being offered bad deals cause they assume I'm too dumb to figure it out (I concede this might not have to do with gender, but with their own stupidity and lack of bottom line thinking, or predatory behaviour in general).

- Having a depressive episode from a boss who was CONSTANTLY ragging me for my hair, my makeup (or lack thereof), my nail polish, my clothes, my sense of fashion...etc. This person...made me loathe the people of Japan and created a shit ton of suffering for me, exacerbating my already onerous body image issues. She wouldn't have treated a man like that.

- Being judged solely by appearance and the condition of my reproductive system. Not being allowed to age (more body image issues). Knowing that I'm worthless past the age of 30 or 40 or 50, invisible, unable to find a partner, get hired for anything else and...well. I have enough depression to deal with right now.

- Knowing I can never be president of the United States.

- Instead of acknowledging there are legitimate reasons in life I'm angry or upset, being dismissed like "Are you on your period?" or just snarky "PMS" rumblings. No respect. Just none. And I don't even suffer from PMS! I hate the assumption that "all women do", since I'm pretty sure it's not even the majority that get mood swings.

- Knowing that there's an entire contingent of angry young men out there who hate me solely because I'm a woman and I'm a pampered princess with alllllll these advantages over them.

I haven't found that being a woman protects me from anything...I don't get free drinks, I don't get ahead "cause I'm pretty", I can't just have sex with anyone I want, and I have suffered from plenty of abuses and nastiness in life--sorry guys, we're all in the same boat.

I recognize the stupidity inherent in some of the other answers as well--I've dealt with this for many years. The way people expect me to be a giggly bubbling idiot, instead of contained and serious. Always being told to smile like a performing monkey. Putting up with the stupid bullshit of other girls saying one thing and meaning another and somehow they all understand these secret signals and I don't. How I'm expected to fawn all over babies and want to hold them. Yeah, I hate all that stuff. Just, I hate the things that have had real world consequences even more.

One more thing, this pisses a lot of women off, but I haven't found I was ever subject to harassment, constant catcalling, stalking, etc. Maybe I just wasn't attractive to the guys, idk. Maybe some girls project--I've certainly never seen this behaviour directed toward anyone else either, actually. Maybe it's just that I convey that I'm off-limits somehow. I can recall one instance in my life where I was groped on a bus, and I stomped the guy's bare toes so hard that he screamed and ran away and, hopefully, maintained proper boundaries thereafter. I don't know, but for the record, I haven't ever felt like I was in danger specifically because I was a girl, so that's one bad thing I managed to avoid.

 

[anticlimatic]

I have addressed this before. Next.

Seeing as how it's the entire point I'm making, maybe addressing it now would be pertinent if you're going to address anything at all.

Ah, yes - the excuses people make when they cannot actually answer the question or rebut the argument. You should be well prepared to be called out on this when discussing contentious points with me. Dismissing potentially related observations out of hand and confusing politics with science as you are doing are sloppy, lazy tactics that reflect willful ignorance.

Here's where I see how minorities in STEM fields fit in with hard things about being a woman:

5. Provocative, Bullying, Hostile, and Trolling Behavior

Flaming, insults, provocative, and personal attacks are not allowed, including in reputation comments, private messages, visitor messages, Vent, Discord or social groups. This includes items such as the following:
Instances where a member insults, attacks, or abuses, another member. Insults are defined as speaking or treating another with disrespect or scornful abuse. Examples of prohibited behavior include calling another names, putting them down, attacking another’s character, humiliating or affronting them, or posts that disparage, discredit, belittle, libel, slander, malign, defame, or denigrate another member.
Apparent intents to enrage, disparage, or antagonize another user of the forum, especially repeated instances of such.
Constant backbiting and/or aggressively confrontational posting.
Threats of harm to any individual, groups of individuals or to this forum.
Posting or communication that vilifies, degrades, attacks or incites prejudicial action against a person or group on the basis of race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, gender identity, disability, appearance, mental capacity or sexual orientation.
Repeated instances of spamming, consistent off-topic posting or history of thread derailing.

We have both made our points, which are posted now for anyone interested in seeing both sides.

You made a point somewhere...? As far as I can see you responded to my data and reasoning with a big unsubstantiated 'nuh-uh' predicated on your subjective preference and values.

 

[Lark]

Its bound to be the constant attraction to Lark is the hardest thing about being a woman