I'm hard pressed to consider 20-50 year old American women as having been culturally oppressed

[tumbleddown]

@Justin_Bailey

Honestly, it’s because I don’t understand at all. I’ve apparently been very lucky, but sexism has just never been a part of my worldview.

This is called male privilege. Not being on the receiving end of sexism insulates you. You have the privilege to be blind to it, and to its effects. You don’t see it because you don’t have to.

In school, the smartest kids were always female. As I said earlier, the valedictorian and the saluditorian of my high school were girls and both were light years ahead of the guy at #3.

That these young women had success doesn’t mean that they didn’t have obstacles in their paths, it means that they overcame the obstacles they encountered. It doesn’t mean that they didn’t have detractors, it means that they ignored or defied them. It doesn’t mean that they didn’t have people scoffing at their achievements, it means that they didn’t internalize those messages.

One went on to become a college professor and the other is a researcher who just won some prestigious fellowship. Saying “girls still get told they’re not good enough” just sounds ridiculous to me.

People have said “you’re not good enough” to every successful woman you can think of. Hillary Clinton just went through a year+ of people telling her that she wasn’t good enough, often for the most spurious of reasons. When she had a long, tiring day on the campaign trail and was being called everything but her name she cried, and the gender-based teardown went into hyperdrive. Justice Sotomayor just had Senators who can’t string together a truthful and coherent sentence saying that she just wasn’t good enough because she dared to view the world through Latina female eyes, not “normal” white male eyes like theirs. Sandra Day O’Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Carol Bartz, Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Kathleen Sebelius, Janet “has no life” Napolitano, every single one can point to instances even after they were well proven to have exactly what it takes to do what they do and do it well where they were told that they weren’t good enough, for ridiculous reasons, many of which boiled down to having the wrong equipment between their legs.

@Lynn_Bodoni

I love the movie “Grease”, but I’ve always thought that it really took me out of the setting when the high school principal, vice principal, and auto shop teacher were all women.

Nitpick - there was no vice principal in the Grease movies.

[DiosaBellissima]

@Justin_Bailey

This is the only way that sexism will survive in the 21st century. In stories so outrageous they sound made up. But very shortly, these old coots (and they are individuals, a fact constantly missed in discussions like this) will retire, or die off, and a thread like this will feel like a strange anachronism like worrying about “those women drivers”.

Sorry, I missed your reply. Just so you know, those comments I referred to almost always come from 30-40 something women and 20 something males. Way more from the women, strangely.

I always found it weird because the college aged guys, well, you’d generally think they were more liberal. And you’d think the middle aged women would be all rah rah smart girls! But nope.

And strange enough- I’ve noticed in my life that older men (the old coots you refer to, I assume) tend to be the most respectful of everyone- they think it’s bad ass that I can talk about politics in an intelligent fashion with them. It’s the middle aged women and young guys who roll their eyes.

And yes, I realize this is just my experience. I’ve just always found it fascinating, especially now that I see my kids encountering the same stuff.

[Tamerlane]

@Dangerosa

When reviewing the syllabus - with your name and office hours…

"You will notice that I have a PhD. A lot of students call me Miss or Mrs. People with a PhD worked really hard for that and tend to prefer being addressed as Doctor.

Purely a sidebar to this discussion, but this would have made think much less of the professor that would write the above. I’m Mr. Informality and have always vastly preferred professors that wanted to be called by their first name. Those ( and I had a couple ) who made a point of telling the class that they wished to be referred to as “Dr. So-and-So” were somewhat despised for that attitude by many ( well me and some of my peers ). It seems like effete and egocentric snobbery from my cheap seat.

But I grant I have my issues :p.

Note: I should add that my default was generally to refer to professors as “professor” or “Dr. So-and-so” until told otherwise. It was those that made a point of it that I held in particularly poor regard.

[Dangerosa]

@Tamerlane

Purely a sidebar to this discussion, but this would have made think much less of the professor that would write the above. I’m Mr. Informality and have always vastly preferred professors that wanted to be called by their first name. Those ( and I had a couple ) who made a point of telling the class that they wished to be referred to as “Dr. So-and-So” were somewhat despised for that attitude by many ( well me and some of my peers ). It seems like effete and egocentric snobbery from my cheap seat.

But I grant I have my issues :p.

Note: I should add that my default was generally to refer to professors as “professor” or “Dr. So-and-so” until told otherwise. It was those that made a point of it that I held in particularly poor regard.

Fretful said she preferred firstname, too - but that isn’t the custom at her school.

[Fretful_Porpentine]

I’m pretty much on board with Tamerlane’s reaction – I feel like it would be awkward to insert such a statement into the first day of class without coming across as pompous and self-important. I can sometimes deflect the ones who default to “Mrs.” with humor, by saying it alarms me when students marry me off without my consent, but it’s hard to insist on “Dr.” without sounding like an ass. And really, I’d much rather be “Ms.” than sound like an ass.

[Lynn_Bodoni]

I’m reminded of a conversation I had about 20 years or so ago with another fantasy roleplaying gamer, who happened to be young and male. We were discussing various fantasy artists, and the topic turned to Larry Elmore. Now, Elmore is a decent enough artist…when he’s drawing anything but human females. If he draws a human or humanoid female, though, she’s going to look almost exactly the same as any other human female he’s drawn, with perhaps a different hairstyle or clothing options. But she will almost certainly be wearing a thong or gstring and a halter or bikini top. The gamer guy was all adrool over anticipating Elmore’s next work. Elmore was drawing, or had just finished drawing, Snarfquest at the time (and why were those bateared critters attracted to human females?). I said that I would appreciate it if Elmore tried to make his different female characters a little different from each other, rather than using the same template each time. He couldn’t comprehend what I was saying. I dragged out a stack of Dragon magazines, and pointed out that if you blocked out the hairstyles, THIS female character was a clone of THIS one, and THAT one too. Even the faces were pretty much identical. Male characters, on the other hand, were each different from the others. Not just faces, but body types too. The guy had never realized this, and had never considered the possibility that Elmore was offending female gamers by doing this sort of stuff. He had a hard time wrapping his head around the notion that women wanted to be treated as real people. Now this guy knew me, gamed with me, considered me a good gamer, and liked me as a person. But he’d never really discussed women’s issues with me, or possibly with anyone.

Possibly Elmore has changed his style, but I wouldn’t make any bets on it.

When I read Archie comics, and Superman comics, I was struck by how almost all the female characters had the same bodies and faces. An older woman, if she was shown at all, did look older, and I believe that there was one short girl in the Archie comics who was an individual. But for the most part, a female character who was 15-30 could only be told apart from another female by her hair and eye color, and clothing choices. Males, on the other hand, had different bodies and faces, and most of these types were considered attractive.

The thing is, many men (old and young) tend to view females as pretty much interchangeable. We might have different hairstyles, but there’s one ideal body type, and there’s one ideal age group. One of the things that I found most objectionable in one of Rex Stout’s books was Archie’s declaration that he wouldn’t exercise his eyeballs on women over a certain age. Yes, this was a character speaking, and not necessarily an author, but given Stout’s other writings (in letters and memos as well as for publication), I think it’s fair to say that Stout didn’t think that women were really worth thinking about as individuals, just as plot devices. Sure, he might have loved his wife and daughter(s)(can’t remember if he had more than one), but as a general rule, he didn’t consider women to be full humans. They were simply background. All of the REAL thinking and doing was performed by men. Things have changed somewhat since then, but not nearly enough.

[lisacurl]

I’ve always wondered why these new-fangled soul-having vampires who are centuries old are inevitably romantically attracted to 16-25 year old young women. That’s one thing that Anne Rice got right, in that the vampires lived so long that they were so removed from human society, they could not relate to the current cohort. But if they did, why would they be all deeply emotionally involved with someone who didn’t remember even a fragment of what they did?

At least Buffy and Angel can talk shop, but I want to smack that *Twilight *woman.

[Cat_Fight]

Two annoying little things currently on the Dope that, while not exactly cultural oppression, still stick in my craw. And – surprise, surprise – neither of them are the porn- or rape-related threads currently in the GD.

1. What if someone became the new Walter Cronkite?

Suppose a respected journalist was made a news anchor, and cut through the sensationalist crap and teasers and whatnot? Instead he would deliver the news without slant or gratuitous commentary. Granted, the corporate bosses would have a hard time with it. CNN journalists are forced to remind people every five minutes that CNN is the Worlds Most Trusted News Source. But let’s assume that this journalist had enough clout to do it his (i.e. Cronkite’s) way.

With Diane Sawyer’s recent promotion, it’s a bit odd to assume that this new old face of the news will be a man (except that I do think we’re still stuck in having a wise old man be the face of truth and authority).

2. Whatever happened to the poor, poor unicorn?

Unicorns need a better image methinks. Unicorns get no respect. Guys aren’t typically willing to touch a unicorn with a ten-foot-pole. Unicorns were once thought of as regal and powerful as I think they should. Now they’ve been reduced to being a thing for “little girls”. I find it to be a sad state of affairs. […] So, how did this happen anyways? How did such a cool creature end up being thought of so poorly? And when did they start to be seen as “girly” anyways?

Okay, okay. I know it’s pretty much a joke. But are little girls not people? What about stuff little boys supposedly like – videogames, comics, airplanes and cars? Are they automatically uncool, too? Little girls are hilarious and entertaining – no more using ‘girly’ as a synonym for lame!

Like I said, these aren’t keeping me up at night. But I noticed them around the same time.

[MOIDALIZE]

So I guess we’ve reached the point in the thread where the ladies are going to bitch and moan about everything. I mean, Diane Sawyer? Unicorns? They have to get serious consideration no matter what?

[Cat_Fight]

@MOIDALIZE

So I guess we’ve reached the point in the thread where the ladies are going to bitch and moan about everything. I mean, Diane Sawyer? Unicorns? They have to get serious consideration no matter what?

Like I said, I have priorities. But they are little things (like language choice) that, when encountered together along with some other threads and comments (quite a few ‘I thought you were a guy’ comments regarding posters, too), remind me that male is still the default, even when everyone’s anonymous.

[raindrop]

@DianaG

I wish I could remember who it was that originally said “the problem for women in the workplace isn’t the glass ceiling, it’s the sticky floor.”

It’s Not the Glass Ceiling, It’s the Sticky Floor: And Other Things Our Daughters Should Know About Marriage, Work, and Motherhood by Karen Engberg.

[lisacurl]

@MOIDALIZE

So I guess we’ve reached the point in the thread where the ladies are going to bitch and moan about everything. I mean, Diane Sawyer? Unicorns? They have to get serious consideration no matter what?

Would the gentleman like to make Very Serious Complaints in a non-emotional way? “Bitch and moan,” indeed. If you have a problem with one particular woman’s post, then say so. Otherwise, your generalizations are getting on my shoe.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Cat_Fight

1. What if someone became the new Walter Cronkite?

With Diane Sawyer’s recent promotion, it’s a bit odd to assume that this new old face of the news will be a man (except that I do think we’re still stuck in having a wise old man be the face of truth and authority).

Language choice is a funny thing. Aside from using the unwieldy “he/she” or “they”, it’s better just to stick with a single pronoun and run with it. And besides, I’ve seen the reverse plenty of times as well. The funniest was an article/discussion about horribly bloody video games and the author continually referred to a hypothetical gamer of bloody, horror games as “she”.

@Cat_Fight

2. Whatever happened to the poor, poor unicorn?

Okay, okay. I know it’s pretty much a joke. But are little girls not people? What about stuff little boys supposedly like – videogames, comics, airplanes and cars? Are they automatically uncool, too? Little girls are hilarious and entertaining – no more using ‘girly’ as a synonym for lame!

OK, fine. Except, adult women who are interested in unicorns are usually among the dippiest people on the planet. They’re female “wolf shirts” and are deservedly mocked, in my opinion. “Wolf shirts” and Lisa Frank have ensured that both animals will be seen as lame by the general public for a long, long time.

[Kearsen]

I know sexism exists and in some cases seems to be ‘ok’ in society.
Someone up thread mentioned being denied a shift as a result of being female. Or denied a job due to being female.

I am sure there were lots of firemen applicants who were women who were denied jobs as a firefighter ‘strictly because’ they were women. There are certain things that gender roles fill, correctly. Can most women carry a 185lb man up a flight of stairs? Do most women get sick at the sight of a man’s innards hanging out?
Sure, there will ALWAYS be the inconsistencies and women should never be singled out due to ‘being a woman’ but some of the incidences referred to in this thread may have circumstances that would result in a woman getting automatically disqualified.

I personally hate to see women in war (on the front lines). Why? Because I was brought up in a sexist household in which a woman’s life is deemed more important than a man’s. I was brought up to open doors, stop to change a flat, or be generally more polite to women than their male counterparts.

I don’t see it as a bad thing.
I can agree however that some postings in this thread go way way over the top and hope to never see it personally.

Oh and Shakes, you sir are a pussy

[Karweenie]

@Kearsen

I am sure there were lots of firemen applicants who were women who were denied jobs as a firefighter ‘strictly because’ they were women. There are certain things that gender roles fill, correctly. Can most women carry a 185lb man up a flight of stairs?

I hate to say it, but female biology is a huge impediment to full equality in physically demanding jobs. A greater testosterone level leads to greater muscle mass in men than in women, size for size. So for some jobs, this is an impediment. But in the current post-industrial, service-based economy, this difference means less and less.

@Kearsen

Do most women get sick at the sight of a man’s innards hanging out?

I LOL’d. Women do dominate the nursing profession. In my personal experience, men are more squeamish. (Wait until 1:40.)

[Kearsen]

@Karweenie

I hate to say it, but female biology is a huge impediment to full equality in physically demanding jobs. A greater testosterone level leads to greater muscle mass in men than in women, size for size. So for some jobs, this is an impediment. But in the current post-industrial, service-based economy, this difference means less and less.

I LOL’d. Women do dominate the nursing profession. In my personal experience, men are more squeamish. (Wait until 1:40.)

Hell no! I know I AM squeamish. I’m not even watching that so thanks for the heads up.

I’m glad you understood that there are physical differences and sometimes emotional differences in men and women which would deter one or the other from filling certain positions. Men and Women were not created equally and shouldn’t really be judged as such.

[StaudtCJ]

I have absolutely no issue with job-defined strength, height, weight, or other job-related requirements. If one must be able to carry 185 pounds up two flights of stairs to get the job, so be it, as long as it is logical to require such. If one must be able to fit into this particular space, so be it, as long as, again, it makes sense. 6’4", 250 lb. jockeys make NO sense. 5’1", 95 lb. firefighters similarly make no sense. Being able to withstand the sight of blood, feces, urine, and other various organs and leakage should be a requirement for certain jobs. This all makes sense.

When one says “no woman can be X” or “no man can be X”, this is what makes me mad. There are tiny men out there, and there are large women. There are strong and weak (pure strength-wise, I’m not talking about perseverance or anything) individuals out there of all genders. Preventing people of certain sexual orientations from holding teaching jobs, preventing females from being jockeys, or preventing males from being nurses (yes I’ve seen/heard of all three issues) makes me angry, because there is NO reason aside from perception and bigotry for these decisions. It’s no different from the old practice of not allowing darker-skinned individuals in the SEALS because “they have bad night vision”.

[Strassia]

@Kearsen

I personally hate to see women in war (on the front lines). Why? Because I was brought up in a sexist household in which a woman’s life is deemed more important than a man’s. I was brought up to open doors, stop to change a flat, or be generally more polite to women than their male counterparts.

I don’t see it as a bad thing.
I can agree however that some postings in this thread go way way over the top and hope to never see it personally.

**Bolding mine
**
There are two problems with this. First, you are devaluing the lives of men and boys. Why is my sons life worth less than somebody else’s daughter?

Second, when you say women are more important, what does that mean? Does it mean they should be protected from the harsher things in life? Just war, or what about other harsh things? That was one of the many justifications for keeping women from managing their own property or having careers in times gone by.

Jonathan

[Dangerosa]

@Kearsen

I am sure there were lots of firemen applicants who were women who were denied jobs as a firefighter ‘strictly because’ they were women. There are certain things that gender roles fill, correctly. Can most women carry a 185lb man up a flight of stairs? Do most women get sick at the sight of a man’s innards hanging out?

I discovered that I was making less than the men in my position…

I had a degree, they didn’t.
I had a technical certification, they didn’t
I had three years more job experience in the field, they didn’t.
I outperformed them on casework, handling more difficult cases, and more cases.

This isn’t something that required heavy lifting, this was Network Administration. I didn’t even have to lug servers around at this job (although I later did, and did it just fine).

HRs response “they have families.”

The two men in the position - one was gay (and single), the other was 22 and single.

[Strassia]

@Dangerosa

I discovered that I was making less than the men in my position…

I had a degree, they didn’t.
I had a technical certification, they didn’t
I had three years more job experience in the field, they didn’t.
I outperformed them on casework, handling more difficult cases, and more cases.

This isn’t something that required heavy lifting, this was Network Administration. I didn’t even have to lug servers around at this job (although I later did, and did it just fine).

HRs response “they have families.”

The two men in the position - one was gay (and single), the other was 22 and single.

This is one of the cultural assumptions behind the wage gap. Usually, these days, it is not as blatant at this. IANL, but if you recorded those discussions and it is worth it to you, you might have an legal case. More often the cause is more general and internal. Women tend to be socialized to think of their jobs as secondary or optional. The expectation that when they settle down their husband will be the primary breadwinner lets them choose jobs that may pay less but be more flexible or fulfilling. My wife is a good example. She got her master’s in clinical social work because she wanted to help people and her underlying assumption was that her lifestyle would be set by her husbands income, not hers.

Jonathan