Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 16th, 2017, 07:45 PM   #831

Patton's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: Ohio
Posts: 1,282

Quote:
Originally Posted by larkin View Post
someone please kill this thread..
Says the person who just resurrected it.
Patton is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 21st, 2017, 01:26 PM   #832

holoow's Avatar
Uncivilized barbarian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Vilnius, Lithuania
Posts: 3,428

Does the norm 'Women and children first' shows that in so-called 'patriarchal society' men's lives are considered to be of lesser value than women's lives?
holoow is offline  
Old March 21st, 2017, 02:39 PM   #833
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2016
From: USA
Posts: 4,207

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowell2 View Post
ok. thought so but wanted to verify it.

On the issue of feminism, here's a real issue: Nude photo-sharing scandal at Marines expands to other branches | Fox News

I would go after every marine that stalked women on media and shared photos in this manner. a dishonorable discharge would be the least of it. It's not that I would object to Playboy or having nude photos. I wouldn't object to the women in the military having nude photos of men.If the person was gay I wouldn't care if they had same sex nude photos. My objection is that they were treating fellow soldiers that way. it's because they not only had photos, they went out of their way to stalk and take the photos without their fellow marine's consent. THAT goes against the need of the military to have coherent troops that work together, trust each other in highly volatile and dangerous situations (combat and otherwise) and this destroys such. You don't treat your fellow soldier like that.

on a legal issue, stalking someone and taking photos without their consent is a crime. the people in pinups generally are paid for that or volunteer.


You going to court martial them for drinking and swearing too?
aggienation is offline  
Old March 21st, 2017, 06:05 PM   #834

Lowell2's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: California
Posts: 6,311

Quote:
Originally Posted by aggienation View Post


You going to court martial them for drinking and swearing too?
neither is illegal. stalking people and using nude photos for porn is. It would be equally illegal if they were posting nude photos of males and posting them for the titillation of civilian women. drinking on duty WOULD be a court martial offence. being drunk on duty even more so, especially in a war zone. Swear at a superior officer? pretty different from swearing while digging out the latrine.
Lowell2 is offline  
Old March 21st, 2017, 06:58 PM   #835

Aineias Taktikos's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2014
From: United States of America
Posts: 898

Quote:
Originally Posted by aggienation View Post


You going to court martial them for drinking and swearing too?
Not at all comparable to spreading revenge porn and discussing sexually assaulting women.
Aineias Taktikos is offline  
Old November 12th, 2017, 05:24 PM   #836

VHS's Avatar
VHS
Vague Historical Studies
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: An inconsequital planet
Posts: 3,411

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowell2 View Post
I certainly believe myself capable of taking a woman's point of view. But I also think a stick figure is a stick figure and assigning it a gender and asserting it's male is taking something to the extreme. Priapus is a male figure. Venus is a feminine figure. The image on a walk signal is neither extreme. As I have already challenged -- show that the walk signal is definitely male. It could be bigfoot for all the definition it has. Or a Klingon. All it shows is a biped hominid.

As for most generic symbols being male? I really hadn't noticed. is this a ewe or a ram?
Click the image to open in full size. it's an irish road sign for "sheep might be in the area".

here's a pedestrian sign. is it sexist because the male is taller? wearing pants and the smaller figure is wearing a skirt? how about holding hands (or one could decide the taller figure is controlling the smaller one)
Click the image to open in full size.

That was an attempt to avoid sexist interpretations of a simple indication of HOMINID ON ROAD.
Click the image to open in full size.
I don't see a penis or breasts on that. hence my view is that it's a neuter symbol. And again, one could have it represent a yeti just as easily.
We are currently rejecting the dress/skirt symbol for women because it is a little out of date today.
Apart from underwear, we have mostly unisex clothes today.
VHS is offline  
Old December 30th, 2017, 02:51 AM   #837

Fox's Avatar
Fox
散木
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Korea
Posts: 3,609

Why is feminism a dirty word? Another potential answer comes from this study (pdf download link): it likely misportrays the reality of how boys and girls are actually treated by the education system:

Quote:
Athens, Ga. – Why do girls get better grades in elementary school than boys-even when they perform worse on standardized tests?

New research from the University of Georgia and Columbia University published in the current issue of Journal of Human Resources suggests that it’s because of their classroom behavior, which may lead teachers to assign girls higher grades than their male counterparts.

“The skill that matters the most in regards to how teachers graded their students is what we refer to as ‘approaches toward learning,'” said Christopher Cornwell, head of economics in the UGA Terry College of Business and one of the study’s authors. “You can think of ‘approaches to learning’ as a rough measure of what a child’s attitude toward school is: It includes six items that rate the child’s attentiveness, task persistence, eagerness to learn, learning independence, flexibility and organization. I think that anybody who’s a parent of boys and girls can tell you that girls are more of all of that.”

The study, co-authored by Cornwell and David Mustard at UGA and Jessica Van Parys at Columbia, analyzed data on more than 5,800 students from kindergarten through fifth grade. It examined students’ performance on standardized tests in three categories¬¬-reading, math and science-linking test scores to teachers’ assessments of their students’ progress, both academically and more broadly.

The data show, for the first time, that gender disparities in teacher grades start early and uniformly favor girls. In every subject area, boys are represented in grade distributions below where their test scores would predict.


The authors attribute this misalignment to what they called non-cognitive skills, or “how well each child was engaged in the classroom, how often the child externalized or internalized problems, how often the child lost control and how well the child developed interpersonal skills.” They even report evidence of a grade bonus for boys with test scores and behavior like their girl counterparts.

This difference can have long-reaching effects, Cornwell said.

The trajectory at which kids move through school is often influenced by a teacher’s assessment of their performance, their grades. This affects their ability to enter into advanced classes and other kinds of academic opportunities, even post-secondary opportunities,” he said. “It’s also typically the grades you earn in school that are weighted the most heavily in college admissions. So if grade disparities emerge this early on, it’s not surprising that by the time these children are ready to go to college, girls will be better positioned.”

Research about gender differences in the classroom and beyond has grabbed headlines recently. Titles like Hannah Rosin’s “The End of Men and the Rise of Women” and Kay Hymowitz’s “Manning Up” have spent months on best-seller lists and inspired countless discussions in the media.

“We seem to have gotten to a point in the popular consciousness where people are recognizing the story in these data: Men are falling behind relative to women. Economists have looked at this from a number of different angles, but it’s in educational assessments that you make your mark for the labor market,” Cornwell said. “Men’s rate of college going has slowed in recent years whereas women’s has not, but if you roll the story back far enough, to the 60s and 70s, women were going to college in much fewer numbers. It’s at a point now where you’ve got women earning upward of 60 percent of the bachelors’ degrees awarded every year.”

But despite changing college demographics, the new data may not be reflecting anything fundamentally new.

“My argument is that this has always been true about boys and girls. Girls didn’t all of a sudden become more engaged and boys didn’t suddenly become more rambunctious,” Cornwell said. “Their attitudes toward learning were always this way. But it didn’t show up in educational attainment like it does today because of all the factors that previously discouraged women’s participation in the labor force, such as a lack of access to reliable birth control.”

What remains unclear, however, is how to combat this discrepancy.

The most common question we’ve gotten is whether or not the gender of the teacher matters in regards to grading students,” Cornwell said. “But that’s a question we can’t answer because there’s just not enough data available. As you can probably guess, the great majority of elementary school teachers are women.
Assuming this study is correct, it essentially means that teachers consistently penalize male students in favor of female students from day one. In such an environment, how ought one to respond to an ideological group that pushes for additional attention and resources to go towards female students, who are already on average receiving a grade premium based upon non-cognitive factors; who look at a set of circumstances in which females are already favored and males already penalized, and go on to say, "We must do more for our girls?" The answer to that question is obviously up to the individual to decide, of course, but it should not surprise us if people who possess a genuine inclination towards equity respond by saying, "To respond to such an imbalance by demanding its exacerbation is unreasonable," and reject the one making such a demand.
Fox is online now  
Old December 30th, 2017, 03:10 AM   #838

AlpinLuke's Avatar
Knight-errant
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Lago Maggiore, Italy
Posts: 20,478
Blog Entries: 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox View Post
Why is feminism a dirty word? Another potential answer comes from this study (pdf download link): it likely misportrays the reality of how boys and girls are actually treated by the education system:



Assuming this study is correct, it essentially means that teachers consistently penalize male students in favor of female students from day one. In such an environment, how ought one to respond to an ideological group that pushes for additional attention and resources to go towards female students, who are already on average receiving a grade premium based upon non-cognitive factors; who look at a set of circumstances in which females are already favored and males already penalized, and go on to say, "We must do more for our girls?" The answer to that question is obviously up to the individual to decide, of course, but it should not surprise us if people who possess a genuine inclination towards equity respond by saying, "To respond to such an imbalance by demanding its exacerbation is unreasonable," and reject the one making such a demand.
I am aware of this curiosity in the educational system [I read an article once and it's almost the same also in Italy]. The problems for the female individuals in our societies begin after the end of the educational cycle, when they want to enter the word of common job, of politics, of research, of teaching ...

Still today statistics [in Italy I know for sure, but it seems that in US it's the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender..._United_States] say that women gain less money than men. Furthermore they find it difficult to reach the high position in the social pyramid [manager, politician, uni professor ...].

Here there is still something to do.
AlpinLuke is offline  
Old December 30th, 2017, 04:41 AM   #839

sparky's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2017
From: Sydney
Posts: 1,486

.
An issue which I have some interest in is the free professional choice of women
it is quite obvious than some activities are not chosen much , this result in gender imbalance
then there are outcry that women should be favored for those professions which they do not seems to want
should women be compelled to enter some professions or trades , while being discouraged to flood others , mostly in the administrative and governmental sectors
those are usually not as financially rewarding as other more technical endeavors

some quotas maybe?
sparky is offline  
Old December 30th, 2017, 05:36 AM   #840

Fox's Avatar
Fox
散木
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Korea
Posts: 3,609

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlpinLuke View Post
I am aware of this curiosity in the educational system [I read an article once and it's almost the same also in Italy]. The problems for the female individuals in our societies begin after the end of the educational cycle, when they want to enter the word of common job, of politics, of research, of teaching ...
Perhaps, perhaps not, but even if we take that as granted, it in no way remedies the circumstances described above, nor the inconsistent way in which many proponents of feminism have responded to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlpinLuke View Post
Still today statistics [in Italy I know for sure, but it seems that in US it's the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender..._United_States] say that women gain less money than men. Furthermore they find it difficult to reach the high position in the social pyramid [manager, politician, uni professor ...].

Here there is still something to do.
That's not as clear to me as you suggest, for two reasons:

1) The parties who seek to utilize these statistics to claim broad discrimination in need of remedy make a massive assumption: that any disparity which they cannot personally imagine a justification for defaults to "discrimination." For example, when you take the base pay disparities and adjust for concerns like total hours worked, time taken off, and so forth, you see them narrow; how much they narrow is based upon the assumptions of the interpreter, and different studies can reach different results. Yet even if some disparity remains after certain factors are neutralized, that does not mean that other factors do not exist which might explain disparities in non-discriminatory terms. Of especial note is the any attempt to correct for work place evaluations, because they contain an implicit social component, one of the same sort which causes female grades to be inflated during their education. "Man X and Woman Y got similar rankings in their work review, but you pay Man X more," seems to result in a reflexive judgment of discrimination, yet another possibility exists: that the evaluator simply likes Woman Y enough to inflate her evaluation, despite tacitly realizing Man X benefits the company more, resulting in it being willing to pay more to retain him. This would closely model the same disparity that exists, according to the study I linked a short while ago, between boys' higher science test scores (actual performance) and girls' higher science grades (subjective evaluation tainted by social concerns). Is this actually the case? I don't know, but it's not clear that it's not the case, and the assumptions being made are a real weakness in statistical approaches to this problem. The most one can reliably say is, "Here is what we know, and here is what we don't know."

2) The above goes doubly for concerns regarding advancement. For example, my father is the recently-retired CEO of a sizable accounting firm. He was at a dinner party not too long ago, and some ladies gave him the line, "Women have to work much harder than men just to receive equal recognition and opportunity for advancement." Because he is retired, he could respond honestly, and told the women in question, "At our firm, it was the exact opposite: women with even the smallest shred of potential were aggressively promoted beyond where they would have been if they had been men, and were retained where men would have been fired, because of concerns about corporate image and lawsuits." Do you think his firm was the only one where that is true? Given countless other businesses will be operating in the same regulatory environment, with the same set of risks, the same strategy will naturally come to mind. By contrast, it's impossible to see what a company stands to gain in the current regulatory and cultural environment by discriminating against women as an end in itself. Given this, there's a certain illogic in reflexively assuming that a disparity in, for example, high-level management is necessarily discriminatory in character.

There are doubtlessly individual cases where a given person has experienced discrimination because of their sex; this is true for men as well as women. But when we cease to look at individual cases and look at broad statistical trends, and moreover, do so in a fashion that consciously attributes motive based upon information gaps ("We can't account for disparity X, therefore it must be..."), we're opening the door wide for bias. Given the prevailing social bias at the moment seems to be aggressively pro-female, one would expect the bias applied to such statistical interpretation to likewise seek to benefit women, and unsurprisingly, that's the result we get. That doesn't necessitate that such interpretations are wrong, of course, but it does give cause for hesitancy in blindly accepting them, especially since their biggest assumption -- that there are no meaningful gender differences significant enough to justify disparate results absent other overriding factors -- is essentially what they're trying to prove in claiming that informational gaps are proof of discrimination in the first place.

Interesting finding in Australia:

Quote:
A measure aimed at boosting female employment in the workforce may actually be making it worse, a major study has found.

Leaders of the Australian public service will today be told to "hit pause" on blind recruitment trials, which many believed would increase the number of women in senior positions.

Blind recruitment means recruiters cannot tell the gender of candidates because those details are removed from applications.

It is seen as an alternative to gender quotas and has also been embraced by Deloitte, Ernst & Young, Victoria Police and Westpac Bank.

In a bid to eliminate sexism, thousands of public servants have been told to pick recruits who have had all mention of their gender and ethnic background stripped from their CVs.

The assumption behind the trial is that management will hire more women when they can only consider the professional merits of candidates.

Their choices have been monitored by behavioural economists in the Prime Minister's department — colloquially known as "the nudge unit".

Professor Michael Hiscox, a Harvard academic who oversaw the trial, said he was shocked by the results and has urged caution.

"We anticipated this would have a positive impact on diversity — making it more likely that female candidates and those from ethnic minorities are selected for the shortlist," he said.

"We found the opposite, that de-identifying candidates reduced the likelihood of women being selected for the shortlist."
The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview.

Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door.

"We should hit pause and be very cautious about introducing this as a way of improving diversity, as it can have the opposite effect," Professor Hiscox said.


...
This is the exact opposite of what one would expect to see if men were benefiting and women were suffering from implicit sexist biases. And what's even more interesting is the response of the Harvard professor. Logically, if blind recruitment resulted in more men being hired, one might reasonably conclude, "Well, I guess the men deserved to be hired." Instead, the response is, "We had better not do this, because it's not engineering the results we want." That suggests two things. First, that Professor Michael Hiscox's understanding of the world is more ideological than empirical in character. Second, that the parties in question are so eager to engineer the system in favor of women that they're willing to consciously reject an approach they had otherwise believed to be fair.

Quote:
He was also keen to point out the public service has a long way to go on gender equality, saying attention should now turn to creating more flexible working conditions and training.

Men continue to outnumber women at senior ranks of the public service, despite vastly outnumbering men at the rank-and-file level.
Notice that? Women "vastly outnumbering men at the rank-and-file level" implies that women are hired at a vastly greater rate than men, yet that's simply ignored in favor of trying to ensure that the disparity continues up the promotion chain. Nevermind that there may be very good reasons for the disparity in the senior ranks; reasons the Professor himself alludes to when the article summarizes him as saying, "He was also keen to point out the public service has a long way to go on gender equality, saying attention should now turn to creating more flexible working conditions and training." "Flexibility" is such a great word: it means essentially nothing, which allows you all the scope required to take the subjective, emotion-based biases that benefit young grade school girls and apply them to adult female employees at some public agency somewhere.

Last edited by Fox; December 30th, 2017 at 05:54 AM.
Fox is online now  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
dirty, feminism, word



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Steven Pinker defends Equity Feminism and criticizes Gender Feminism Sharks And L0ve Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 6 March 10th, 2017 07:04 PM
Word for word translation of Livy's description of triplex acies OctaBech Ancient History 2 March 7th, 2017 03:02 PM
Is "Orientalism" still a dirty word? timdog General History 12 May 27th, 2011 08:52 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.