Nor is there any reason to keep talking about it in this forum instead of Great Debates or the Pit, where there are threads on this topic already. And Shodan, your example seems calculated to annoy - which also doesn’t belong in this forum.
When we give boys freedom to be nurses and stay at home dads we will all be liberated. As long as women’s roles are roles boys are discouraged from, there is still femiphobia
Or of course, as a generalization, fewer women may find the subject itself interesting.
If a sentiment like this is not sexist (and it’s not, IMO):
…then I don’t see why it would be sexist to say that perhaps the subject is of interest to a lower proportion of women than men?
(btw: the quote was Peremensoe paraphrasing a particular feminist viewpoint rather than necessarily his/her own opinion)
I agree that men need the societal acceptance to follow their muse into traditionally female roles and that will help break down barriers. But I think it’s important that people get to define success for themselves.
And I have no problem with the idea that since we need more people in STEM fields, we make those fields more attractive to a wider audience. But too often it’s sold as some sort of feminist or societal duty…we need more women in engineering, not we need to make engineering more attractive to more people.
I have to applaud you for saying this, as well as your participation in the Pit threads that helped inspire this one. You and I have had our histories of squabbles, no doubt, but the fact that you seem to understand the rape issue like you do means that I have to respect your brain and integrity.
I remember arguing with you and others inthis thread a couple years ago. After skimming that thread again, I found some of the comments in there (not from you but from others) a lot more disgusting than the stuff posted in recent days. What was even more more disappointing was the low number of men who saw fit to argue against these positions. But I’m glad that thread exists, otherwise we wouldn’t have such blatant evidence that there are folks among us who are rape apologists.
I’m encouraged to see that it’s not just woman now who are challenging the sexist BS that mires discourse on rape prevention. More men are starting to see the light and are speaking up. Thanks for being one of them.
Well, the curious thing is that in 1985 37% of computer and IT grads were women, and the number of women declined by 79% between 2001 and 2008.
In addition, there have been studies done to this effect, and it appears to just not be the case
The Anatomy of Interest: Women in Undergraduate Computer Science
Further, atmosphere may contribute
Ambient Belonging: How Stereotypical Cues Impact Gender
Participation in Computer Science
(Some have used this study to suggest that we require professors to not make sci-fi references in lectures, tutorials, homework, etc (even very well known ones like Star Wars), and that having computer parts lying around drives off women. I say that’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Ah well.)
But no, it’s not inherently sexist to ask the question “maybe they’re just not interested?” Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), that doesn’t seem to be the case, as evidenced by the fact that many try and quit, as well as the fact that they used to be just fine with it for whatever reason.
I could go on for a while on other potential reasons and what I think of the proposed solutions, but this ain’t the thread.
At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I still think that in certain contexts, advice on how to minimize the risk of rape is appropriate. I will certainly talk with my daughters about things they can do to keep themselves safe from a lot of different dangers in the world: food poisoning, civil unrest in countries they might travel to, communicable diseases spread by other people’s poor handwashing techniques, and yes, sexual assault. As their dad, I’m allowed to be paternalistic :). To the extent that other people in that thread suggested that advice on avoiding sexual assault was never appropriate, I still disagree with that position. (There’s a very real chance, of course, that I misunderstood in that thread and nobody held that position.)
But lately what I’ve seen is women saying, “Don’t tell us something we’ve heard a thousand times already, and don’t tell us what we should have done after an assault, and don’t pretend that we can avoid rape entirely by taking common-sense measures.” And all of that is totally reasonable to me.
Oh, also, a 1974 paper that I can’t link to entitled “Issues in Programming Management” purportedly claims (haven’t read it myself) that at that time close to 50% of programmers were women (though census data from around the same time said closer to 22.5%, still fairly high compared to what current levels of graduates would suggest if you assume that some graduates never enter the field despite their degree).
If you can find one person on this board who has posted such a position, I will buy you a car. No BS.
Man, you know it occurs to me, out of the blue with no provocation having not read any posts other than my own since 7:38 this morning that advice about avoiding sexual assault is never appropriate, even when talking to, say, your daughter. Yup, I definitely do think that.
Edit: :eek::eek::eek: My! What a coincidence! You better send that vehicle to LHOD posthaste!
So when do I get my cut?
FTR I would dispute that. I’ve worked with some great female software developers and my girlfriend is a DBA. But on the whole, women just do not often find software engineering or low-level roles very interesting IME, and it would take more than just that paper to convince me otherwise.
The high number of comp sci graduates in 1985 I don’t think says very much either way. This field (if it can still just be called a field) has changed beyond recognition.
But you’re right, this is a topic for another thread (a good topic I think).
Ha! But my use of the past tense disqualifies your post. So no car for you!
Thanks for the completely meaningless nitpick, but it has nothing to do with anything. The intended communication is what we are talking about.
If what the woman wants is irrelevant, then the examples posted of women giving reluctant consent, or saying nothing, when pressured for sex were not raped in any sense. Is that a conclusion you want to live with? After all, the only significant element is the meaning of what they said. If they didn’t say anything, they didn’t mean anything, “stop” included. Intended communication is not important and can be disregarded.
Or take Jragon’s “safe word” counter-example. “Anti-disestablishmentarism” is only significant for its common meaning. So go ahead with the whipping.
Trying to sum up the complexities of the courtship dance into iron-clad binaries misses some of the point.
Regards,
Shodan
Assuming that people are actually telling them those things.
It’s a very limited kind of success, shall we say? Good for those women, if they’re doing what they want to do and are good at. But I see feminism as being much deeper than the career aspirations of that small group.
In the previous post I was not precisely describing my own view, but it is one whose basic premise I agree with: women are both equal, in every moral sense, and distinct. While allowing for the immense variation of individuals, there are perspectives and aptitudes that belong more to women than to men, and our society benefits from the full expression of these.
The problem with sexism is not that it distinguishes genders, but that it denigrates the attributes of one group relative to another, and binds members of both to the unequal expectations of the groups.
So if individual women are only able to break those strictures, and succeed in male-dominated areas, by ‘acting like men,’ that reinforces rather than tears down the prejudice that women qua women have no place in that field. It does little for the liberation of other women, or of men.
That is certainly not what I’ve been talking about. I do not think it is what “we” in this thread have been talking about. What is under discussion is the significance of an utterance of “no” as this concerns the prospective actions of the male in the scenario. The intended communication is irrelevant to what the male ought to do in the scenario. What is relevant is what is said. If she says “no,” it does not matter what she really wants, or what he thinks she really wants. What matters is what she said. She said “no,” and that is a withdrawal of consent. It does not matter what was intended or desired, what matters is what was said.
A possible rejoinder: “So then if she says ‘yes’ but her body language indicates in every way that she doesn’t really want to have sex, should I have sex with her anyway?” The reply to this would be that the general principle is one of caution. If a “no” is accompanied by positive body language, the principle of caution recommends following what is said, and not what is unclearly indicated by nonverbal means. Meanwwhile, if a “yes” is accompanied by negative body language, the principle of caution recommends doubting the accuracy of what is said, at least until clarity is reached. The reason for following the principle of caution is simply the fact that violation of withdrawn consent to sex is a far, far worse thing than failure to follow up on an invitation to have sex.
I agree completely with this. Unlike many other -isms, there really are differences between men and women. Generic sexism would be nothing but the recognition of such, but by extending that to consider one group or the other superior outside of narrow specific criteria causes the problem. Women not wanting to be tech nerds is not a great concern, but regulations or attitudes which prevent women from becoming tech nerds would be a great problem.
That’s right. At least, this would be a necessary part of a full liberation from sexism.
I would just add that the boys and men there must not be required to ‘act like women.’ If women can, potentially, make distinct contributions outside traditionally-female roles (as opposed to simply taking positions that would have once gone only to men, without changing anything), then the corollary statement about men must follow.
My anecdotal experience supports the former statement and I had some studies to back it up.
I agree that this isn’t the thread though.
Doesn’t follow. Rape is sex without consent. Someone who has said nothing has not consented. As for “reluctant consent,” this phrase describes a variety of phenomena so I’d have to know exactly what kind of scenario is being discussed before I could make a judgment as to whether a rape was involved. (Relevant to this, see my previous post for a discussion of cases where an uttered “yes” is accompanied by negative body language.)
I have not said or implied that words’ significance is always only to be determined by their common meaning. Indeed, if a woman says explicitly before a bout of sexual activity, “When I say no I mean yes and when I say yes I mean no, got it?” then she has just made “no” the consenting utterance and “yes” the nonconsentiting utterance.
In fact this is relevant to the scenario under discussion. When she invited him to her apartment, she said explicitly “I know this is often used as a signal of interest, but I am explicitly telling you right now that it is not such a signal in this case.” And he said he understood that. So even if there may have been “mixed signals” had she not said that, she did say that, and thereby established exactly what she was communicating, absolutely clearly and explicitly.
I know, because it makes it harder for guys to get away with things.