Why is sexism not challenged on askaboutmoney?

[michaelm]

It’s an interesting social experiment to see it discussed and aired here.

Hardly.

Perhaps this website would be more diverse if ideas could be discussed without the immediate tag of victim being applied to views that are not held by the majority.

Nobody was tagged as a victim, a non-victim perhaps. Is the diversity you're after actually diversity of opinion or is it diversity of race/gender/sexuality and conformity of opinion?

 

[Purple]

Sexism is a real thing. Male privilege is a real thing. male chauvinism is a real thing.
The thing is that female sexism, female privilege and female chauvinism are real things too.
Maybe men are worse. I don't know. Certainly men have come from a position of almost total power and there's an overhang there still but I don't like the way in which modern feminism makes women frail victims and men the bad guys. I thought feminism was meant to be about women being strong, not changing men on account of women being weak. I don't want my daughters growing up thinking that way.

The other thing is that intent is important. If your pronouns are "them" and "they" I'll try to remember that but if I forget then don't blow a gasket. Same with gender stereotypes; I'll try to avoid them but in my experience women are more guilty of using them than men.

Basically men are asses, but so are women.

 

[Purple]

A victim mentality does not a victim make. Life is too short for Leftist BS.

What's all this nonsense about "Leftist"? This isn't Fox News. We are in Europe, we understand the difference between liberal (socially progressive leaning) and Left (economically socialist leaning).

 

[Blackrock1]

I don't like the way in which modern feminism makes women frail victims and men the bad guys. I thought feminism was meant to be about women being strong, not changing men on account of women being weak. I don't want my daughters growing up thinking that way.

The other thing is that intent is important. If your pronouns are "them" and "they" I'll try to remember that but if I forget then don't blow a gasket. Same with gender stereotypes; I'll try to avoid them but in my experience women are more guilty of using them than men.

Basically men are asses, but so are women.

well said, and i agree i dont want my daughters growing up with that mindset either. I will make sure to give them the confidence to go out and do what they want to do and not hinder themselves with a complex about how the world might treat them.

there are all sorts of obstacles that everyone has to navigate depending on their environment, so what.

 

[cremeegg]

Are you really that unaware?

Or are these replies deliberate trolling?

This is a bit much coming from the person who gave us the oldest and lamest joke ever on AAM in post 10

 

[Blackrock1]

As a woman in this band you mention I don’t know a woman who regards sexism as anything other than a live issue. Plenty of us don’t get equal pay for equal work. The stats support the view I hold.

Perhaps the women you know don’t feel confident in sharing their view with you, or haven’t volunteered it for you. If you raise this as a question or discussion this thread shows the openness of many to discuss. I would not feel comfortable in discussing it with you as instead of trying to understand the poster”s perspective you attacked. It’s an interesting social experiment to see it discussed and aired here. Perhaps this website would be more diverse if ideas could be discussed without the immediate tag of victim being applied to views that are not held by the majority.

If you are in a senior position and doing a good job, delivering for your employer and a man in an identical position is getting paid more (here comes the victim blaming) its your fault. My pay has increased by maybe 150% over the past 5 years, and do you want to know why, i went and demanded it on the basis of what i delivered, what i was responsible for etc etc. Are you pushing your own agenda or sitting back and complaining about how unfair it is while others push theirs and you wait for someone to decide to increase your pay?

And the women i am referring to are very confidend sharing their views with me, they just happen to differ from yours believe it or not.

 

[Betsy Og]

Well said Thirsty. I have not agreed 100% with everything you have said but you are spot on here. Here we have someone telling you what they think what should be important to you, childcare, as opposed to than respecting what you feel is important. Sigh. I am sick of people who don’t want talk about sexism telling women to think about their children.

What you have to bear in mind is the intent of the people using the words/tropes. If kids draw, or adults assume, male bus drivers and female nurses is that such a horrible inditement of our society?, is that holding back the next female CEO? - I doubt it. If that's all we had to be bothering us we'd be in a great place. I humbly suggest there are more important issues to tackle. You can bate this one to death if you insist but I fear the returns will marginal.

 

[michaelm]

What's all this nonsense about "Leftist"?

Leftist thinking pushes identity politics, equality of outcome and is a threat to free speech. Liberal thinking is blind to colour or creed, is for equality of opportunity and freedom of speech. Increasingly, European politics, media and academia is morphing from Liberal to Leftist

 

[michaelm]

Plenty of us don’t get equal pay for equal work. The stats support the view I hold.

This is a fallacy. It is illegal to pay someone less based on gender. If it were legal employers would employ more women over men. This skit goes a long way to explaining same . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GWHgVZJQU

 

[WolfeTone]

There I would disagree.

The language we use is important, it reflects our thinking.

There are plenty of words, which we heard as children, that are no longer considered acceptable in polite society.

There are many behaviours once considered normal (e.g. smoking in restaurants), that are now, not only frowned upon, but illegal.

Changing language can drive social change.

Social change can drive legal change.

Words can be powerful.

I agree with all of this.

But I cant agree that aforementioned comment about wife doing some secretarial work as sexist. It seemed obvious to me that the reference was made in the context of a business owner utilizing his family status to reduce tax liability.

 

[Purple]

This is a fallacy. It is illegal to pay someone less based on gender. If it were legal employers would employ more women over men. This skit goes a long way to explaining same . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GWHgVZJQU

It is important to define what people are talking about when it comes to the gender pay gap (and there is one).
50 years ago it was about 40%. Now it's in the mid teens. This, from Harvard, makes an interesting read.
What is being talked about is not hourly earnings or even full tile equivalent earnings. the gender pay gap refers to lifetime earnings. Women frequently misrepresent this and in doing so to themselves and the real issues they face a disservice.
Women are generally paid the same for the same hours in the same job as men (to do otherwise is illegal).
Women choose to work shorter hours.
Women choose to take extended maternity leave (such leave options are not open to men).
Women make other choices which negatively impact on their income but may positively impact on their overall happiness (which pay partially explain why men are 8-9 times more likely to die from suicide).

Should we change to world to more suit women's desires and needs? Yes, absolutely, in fact we already have and are continuing to do so. It the gender pay gap a result of existing male sexism? No, of course it isn't.

 

[Purple]

Leftist thinking pushes identity politics, equality of outcome and is a threat to free speech. Liberal thinking is blind to colour or creed, is for equality of opportunity and freedom of speech. Increasingly, European politics, media and academia is morphing from Liberal to Leftist

This is for a different thread but that just a lazy mix of different issues born of the loony right disaster merchants on the American far right.

 

[cremeegg]

This is for a different thread but that just a lazy mix of different issues born of the loony right disaster merchants on the American far right.

I think its you who are being lazy on this.

Rights based on identity were the norm in Europe for centuries. Some people could access the Kings justice, others only manorial justice. there were laws governing jews, women, various trades, people who had the right to live in towns, people who didn't etc.

The Enlightenment came along and Rousseau said "All men are created equal" this concept gradually gave us the frame work of rights that existed until recently.

In the 19th century it undermined slavery as all men clearly included men of colour. In the early 20th century it supported votes for women as "all men" was held to encompass women. More recently to supported gay rights as equality was held to encompass sexuality. This was a liberal project and it held sway across Europe and the US until very recently.

It was Martin Luther's ideal "my daughter judged not on the colour of her skin but on the content of her character".

Recently this has been abandoned, the question of achieving equal rights becoming less important than the question of equality of outcome.

The first place this occurred was in university admissions in the US. Admissions requirements were the same for all applicants, but black applicants were gaining less places. This was seen as unfair as black people were more likely to come from disadvantaged backgrounds as so could not compete fairly for college places.

The response to this perfectly reasonable point was a tragedy, rather than combat poverty for all or ensure equality of provision at second and primary level education quotas were introduced at third level. Martin Luthers grand daughter will be judged by the colour of her skin again.

This fuelled the equality of outcome idea and brings us back to identity politics. Law based on race, gender etc. and that is fine (well its not, but it may be seen as fine) while we live in a liberal society. But if the hard right ever get into power they will use the identity politics created by the left against those groups.

The clearest example of all is here in Ireland. We have recently given legal recognition to travellers as an ethnic group, we measure homelessness and live expectancy for travellers. Now I am opposed to that as I think housing policy should be about housing the homeless irrespective of identity.

But if the hard right ever get into power they will start measuring criminality for travellers as well as homelessness and that will be a dark day.

 

[joe sod]

With regard to the gender pay gap, if it were equalised so that female dominant jobs were paid more and that they got paid even if they chose to take a career break , what would be the outcome ?
Well then men would be much more attracted to the female dominated jobs as they would have much better conditions and pay. But nobody would choose the male dominated jobs , so there would be no builders, electricians, plumbers etc. We are already approaching that situation as it is because younger guys don't want to do these jobs as it is.
The result would be the same as what caused the failure of the Soviet union, nobody would do the dirty difficult jobs and everyone gravitated to the easiest jobs they could get as everyone got paid the same. That's why there were shortages of everything in the Soviet union.

 

[Bronte]

Quite.

Now you're being sexist because the answer in this day and age could be that his dead dad was dead but the surgeon was his other father. Honestly Thirsty I don't actually think you're being sexist but I can't be doing with neutral pronouns and being accessed of sexism if I thank a man for keeping the door open for me etc. I just think it's nice.

 

[Purple]

I think its you who are being lazy on this.

Rights based on identity were the norm in Europe for centuries. Some people could access the Kings justice, others only manorial justice. there were laws governing jews, women, various trades, people who had the right to live in towns, people who didn't etc.

The Enlightenment came along and Rousseau said "All men are created equal" this concept gradually gave us the frame work of rights that existed until recently.

In the 19th century it undermined slavery as all men clearly included men of colour. In the early 20th century it supported votes for women as "all men" was held to encompass women. More recently to supported gay rights as equality was held to encompass sexuality. This was a liberal project and it held sway across Europe and the US until very recently.

It was Martin Luther's ideal "my daughter judged not on the colour of her skin but on the content of her character".

Recently this has been abandoned, the question of achieving equal rights becoming less important than the question of equality of outcome.

The first place this occurred was in university admissions in the US. Admissions requirements were the same for all applicants, but black applicants were gaining less places. This was seen as unfair as black people were more likely to come from disadvantaged backgrounds as so could not compete fairly for college places.

The response to this perfectly reasonable point was a tragedy, rather than combat poverty for all or ensure equality of provision at second and primary level education quotas were introduced at third level. Martin Luthers grand daughter will be judged by the colour of her skin again.

This fuelled the equality of outcome idea and brings us back to identity politics. Law based on race, gender etc. and that is fine (well its not, but it may be seen as fine) while we live in a liberal society. But if the hard right ever get into power they will use the identity politics created by the left against those groups.

The clearest example of all is here in Ireland. We have recently given legal recognition to travellers as an ethnic group, we measure homelessness and live expectancy for travellers. Now I am opposed to that as I think housing policy should be about housing the homeless irrespective of identity.

But if the hard right ever get into power they will start measuring criminality for travellers as well as homelessness and that will be a dark day.

Okay, firstly Rousseau said that all men are born free. The second paragraph of the US Declaration of Independence says that all men are created equal (although he was a major inspiration for it given his influence on Jefferson).

Secondly identity politics is not the preserve of those with conservative or liberal ideals or those on the left and right on economic issues. People of all leanings use them to further their goals or stymie the goals of those with whom they disagree. Those who claim to be liberals are as guilty of it as anyone else, made more noticeable now that they are the establishment but still behave like they are the marginalised, but conservatives have never been slow to silence dissenting voices or those who don’t fit in to their definition of how people should behave.

While I’m against quota’s, be they based on gender or ethnicity, it is a nonsense to suggest that without intervention there is any real equality of opportunity.

Travellers are a distinct ethnic group, dating back thousands of years. We do measure criminality for travellers. The data is readily available. We also measure crimes against them and the level of bias and social exclusion they face. We do the same for other ethnic groups. It shows how successful or otherwise our policies in are in relation to our commitments under the European Declaration of Human Rights.