Certainly she can point it out to them. But going on a rant here and calling them “sexist” (which they are not) is biting the hand. She is taking advantage of a huge benefit and them coming here and going on a rant which may hurt their business.
Well, I checked our local Borders today, Mens and Womens interest were pretty small and specific, Maxim, Playboy and mens health and bridal, fashion and hair respectively. Tattoo’s and high times in adult interest, sports, motorcycles, guns, hunting, history and science all in gender neutral locations. Maybe a little cultural inertia in Bakersfield eh? Not the same thing as active sexism IMO. Like me for example, I have kids in the hospital shake their heads a tell me only girls are nurses, but I’d look pretty stupid calling them sexist when their 8 or 10 y/o, and >90% of nurses are women, so I just tell 'em that a boy can be anything he wants to be. Seriously, if you expect to see active prejudice everywhere you look, that’s what you’ll see, whether it’s there or not.
Trust me, that area doesn’t need any help in that department. Is there any -ism that doesn’t thrive there? Its’ California’s own Little Old South sometimes.
- hawksgirl, of Visalia
When I lived in Fresno, I really didn’t consider myself to be in California
Oh get real.
Didn’t you misspell “not as good at hard math and engineering”? 
Why do they stick the gay mags on the far right? And why do they stick the lesbian magazines in with the gay dude magazines? Hello, we need our own cruising… er browsing areas.
But that’s not true in this case. As I documented earlier, science magazines (with the exception of museum of science magazines) have predominately male readerships.
Categorizing of this kind is a maddening task. No matter how you divide things, there will always be confusion and overlap. A lesbian might appreciate Penthouse as much as any man, so putting girly mags in a men’s section doesn’t really solve anything. Some scientists might argue that Discover belongs more under pop culture than science. Should a magazine on technology go under science, or should technology have its own sign? What about logic puzzles? Should they go with crosswords or mysteries? How about architecture — art? home? business?
And then, of course, there’s the nefarious Miscellaneous, into which eventually every new thing is shoved.
They may insult your intellect, but I challenge your assertion that Borders and other marketing outlets make their decisions based on assumptions. As several of us have discussed (or speculated, in my case) market research plays a role in decision-making. Sometimes a pretty big role.
It may surprise you to know that words like ‘fuck’ shouldn’t be filed in the Men’s Interest section these days either. :rolleyes:
Unless you and your roommate are domestic partners, be aware that she could lose her job by selling books to you at her discount.
Just sayin’
I appreciate the advisory, but you’re like the 5th person to say that. As I said before, now that I’m aware that we were misinformed, I have no intention of using it again.
Sorry, I wasn’t bothered by the magazine issue so I didn’t read every post.
I blame Borders and the way they bombard men with tattoo magazines and pictures of nekkid ladies to distract us from ever firing up any neurons.
My two nearest Borders, relevant aisles:
#1:
Top racks: Mens Interests (skin and non-), Sports, Automotive, Film-Video-Guitar-buff mags, Computers, Gaming
Bottom racks: Guns, Aviation, Photography, Travel/Tourism, Design
#2: (smaller aisles)
Top Racks: Mens InterestsSports, Travel/Tourism, Automotive
Bottom racks: more Sports, Aviation, Guns, someotherthing
In #1, “Science” is in an entirely different aisle, again in the bottom rack. I think below Architecture?
In Store #2, Computers and Business are the two top racks of an aisle, with Gaming and Science being the bottom racks.
So it’s quite non-uniform.
One thing I’m gonna do, because until I saw this thread I had never paid attention to it, is go look closer to see if ANY of the bottom racks of periodicals gets a large “headline” sign that identify it as a self-standing category, like the top shelf does. Because I CAN see how if that is so, it WILL make it LOOK like the bottom-rack mags are supposed to be not just physically below, but organizationally “under” whatever the top-shelf is labeled as…
Then you were extremely priveleged or blind.
If we’re going to go anecdotal evidence, as this is the Pit and all, I’ll talk about one of my best friends. She’s a double major - IT and nanotechnology. The woman is a genius; she can do things with computers I couldn’t even imagine in my wildest dreams. I’d hazard a guess that she’d love the opportunity to get a doctorate, if only to prove to herself that she can.
She is also one of maybe two or three women doing what she is at her school, and she gets the bullshit “Women don’t do programming” attitude constantly from her classmates AND her professors. If I were her I’d have punched someone out already; she has the patience of a saint.
Unfortunately, sexism does exist at the higher education level, and it does deter a lot of women from pursuing a doctorate. I know several women who I could cite as direct evidence, from several different colleges and universities throughout the U.S. My friend is but one example.
That said, I don’t really agree with a men’s and women’s interest section. Since most of this post is anecdotal evidence, I’ll bring in some more - I have several male friends who have bought bridal magazines and child-rearing and bearing magazines, out of both curiosity and genuine interest. I have a male, straight friend who subscribes to Vogue.
Classifying anything by gender seems kind of stupid as the line between genders blurs. If anything, Borders is going to lose the “rabid feminist” section of the population, which is getting larger and larger as time passes. Their loss - although, I can’t say I’d really want to hang out with a bunch of Tori Amos fans all the time, myself. I’d still take their money.
~Tasha
Yes, but when it comes time to look for jobs we’re still told “how are we going to get a girl in Production?”, “you’re a girl, girls aren’t good with computers” and “your interests are heavily geared toward compromise and resolution, therefore you can’t be a manager” (can I kill that psychologist please, it would make me feel really, really resolved. Oh, and then I’d like to use his guts to hang whomever wrote those damn tests).
Nava: ChemEng, specialty Orgo, MS in CompuChem/Quantum, currently computer consultant.
I’ve seen several (male, of course) professors vote “no” for an applicant for a teaching job who was absolutely superb. The slides were clear, good and sparing use of color, she spoke clearly, she was able to answer all the questions. The reason given by said professors? She was wearing a pants suit! If that isn’t discrimination by reason of crotch please tell me what is.
I don’t think I was either. I don’t think sexism is as common as some people think, and it’s certainly not a systemic problem today.
This is kind of light on facts. What university is she attending? I went to the University of Pittsburgh, which is a very large school. Though there were many women in Information Science and CS, there were few in Computer Engineering.
What has actually been said? Have you seen and heard this yourself? Or is it your account of what you were told by your friend that you’re posting here, because honestly, some people see what they look for. By and large, women don’t do programming. There aren’t that many of us. That doesn’t say that women can’t do programming. Stating the fact that it’s still a predominantly men in the career field is not sexist.
How is this preventing her from getting a doctorate? She’s free to apply to graduate school upon completion of her Bachelors degree, as anyone else is. Discrimination on the basis of gender in terms of admission is prohibited by federal law. So how exactly is she being kept from getting a Ph.D.? The opportunity is there.
If they gave you specifically a psychological test and found that you specifically are geared too much toward compromise to be what they’re looking for in a managerial position, that’s hardly sexism. It’s that they don’t think you specifically are what they want.
Some people find that every time they don’t get the job they want it had to be because they were a _________ . Some don’t.
I think more pit rants should have photos and diagrams.
That is all. Carry on. 
Having worked at Borders, I can assure you that this is an issue specific to your local store. Ask to speak to their general manager next time you’re there. Odds are he, or someone about a payrate below him, is the sexist.
The Borders I worked at grouped tattoo and porn mags in the same category, but it was called “Adult Interest”. “Men’s Interest” was a section of non-pornographic magazines specifically geared towards men, like Men’s Health, etc.
My location had a “Women’s Interest” section that was about magazines geared toward women, ranging from women’s health to “how to suck a dick to keep a man”, as you put it (well, it is a magazine made for women), to highly intelligent feminist mags. And I think a “Fashion” section which included magazines dedicated to mens’ fashion, womens’ fashion, and both.
BTW, is it just me or is that picture of Joyce Meyer on one of those “fashion” magazines creepy?
Start with the store’s General Manager. If your local Borders is anything like the one I worked at, odds are that if you show up asking to talk to the GM you’ll get an audience with him and you’re not unlikely to come out of the deal with coupons and such. Regardless of what kind of coupons you do or don’t get, keep an eye on the magazine section of the store, and if things don’t change appreciably, move on to the Regional Manager (any employee should be able to tell you the Regional Manager’s name and contact info, or at least look it up in short order). Then move your way up to Corporate. I promise this is a low-level thing and Borders the company (as opposed to Borders the store) probably doesn’t know anything about it. I’m as pissed as you are, BTW, but don’t let this color your view of the entire chain. I’ve worked at both Borders and Barnes & Noble, and everything at Borders is better–the Rewards card, the selection, the pay, the working environment, the benefits, the management, the corporate culture, etc. If I were a betting man, I’d bet a lot that the GM at your location (or someone within a pay rate or two of him) is the sexist.
For completeness’ sake, I’ll note here that the location I worked for had both a Science section and a History section. Both of which were pretty far from the Men’s Interest, Women’s Interest, and Fashion & Health sections. The arts and crafts magazines (don’t remember what the section was called), including knitting and the like, were not visible if you were looking at the Women’s Interest section.
BTW, if I had used my 33% discount for you and you went talking about it on the Internet–in a post with pictures of the store I worked at–I’d be pissed. You would certainly never get the discount again.
No they don’t. My Borders organized them by subject area. Modern Drummer and Guitar Magazine went in the Music section, Guns and Ammo went in Sports or Recreation (I don’t remember which).