sexism?

Torakx · 03-11-2014 8:29pm #1

Not sure if this is the correct forums for this. I think it is.

I was getting on the bus today and let a woman on before me(you can probably guess I am male, consider why.. ).
I later started wondering about that and whether it could be seen as sexism.
Say I let a woman in front of me but not a man, that must be.

In my view, I am not being sexist, as I do the same with men as well.
But it brings the question of equallity to mind, that simple process of choosing who should go first.
Weaker first? Or leader first?

Do feminists for example, consider it chauvanistic to be old fashioned in that way?
Where does the equality begin and end if not?

With our primal nature in mind, the leader usually goes first or last. That is the reason I let most infront of me, albiet instinctually and unconsciously. At the forefront I think I am being polite and respectful.
But I know it's just a leader power play at a primal level.

Anyway, I was curious what others thought of this.

Black Swan · 04-11-2014 12:28am

Torakx wrote: »

Not sure if this is the correct forums for this. I think it is.

MOD: This topic can fall under Humanities no problem. It appears to have an interdisciplinary potential, so go for it.

The Corinthian · 04-11-2014 10:55am

Strictly speaking it is sexist if there is discrimination, positive or negative, principally based on gender.

At the same time, so is greeting a woman with a kiss on the cheek and a man with a handshake is also sexist. Basically, they're traditional or cultural norms.

Whether they are acceptable or not is probably down to whether society still accepts them.

As to the political / feminist aspect, it probably depends on whom you ask. Some consider them chauvinistic throwbacks, some don't even think about them. Certainly there's also been debate on the cherry-picking nature of much of modern feminism too, where sexism that results in positive discrimination is accepted, while that which results in negative discrimination is not, and whether this should in itself be accepted.

Black Swan · 04-11-2014 6:58pm

Torakx wrote: »

Do feminists for example, consider it chauvanistic to be old fashioned in that way?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Certainly there's also been debate on the cherry-picking nature of much of modern feminism too, where sexism that results in positive discrimination is accepted, while that which results in negative discrimination is not, and whether this should in itself be accepted.

Feminism had its place and time, especially during the early days and radical perspectives of Karen Horney, Helene Deutsch, and Corinne Hutt. Those in strong opposition years ago often referred to it pejoratively like an F-word. Today such condescending comments I find cliché.

Feminism went through several waves. Today it appears to have been integrated into a larger diversity perspective, almost as if in Hegelian synthesis. Women both share similar, as well as have different perspectives from men. More importantly, it would appear that it has become just one of many characteristics that makes an individual an individual, and more interesting, given the added dimension of being either female or male.

The Corinthian · 04-11-2014 9:04pm

Not sure how that relates to my post, but it sounds clever.

Torakx · 05-11-2014 4:49pm

I get what is meant by helegian synthesis, I think.
I saw mention of thesis , antithesis and synthesis when I looked it up and I presume Black Swans comments were directed at the process of creating issues, debate on those issues and integration.
Which does seem to be the case. There is an awareness, a period of chaos while we humans argue over what suits us ethicly and then the commonly accepted thing is integrated into society/culture.
Or so it would seem.

I think the mainstream media is the main source of programming that is inflicted on humans, with regards culture.
Here in Ireland I would say we have been americanized and so might relflect their cultural values to a degree. Based on what we learn from our unconscious role models (actors/actresses, acties?lol screw PC its a pain in the arse..).
Which to me means, if more male actors(with a hero archetype) begin to stop letting women on buses etc first, in 20 years there might be some equality in that regard. Apart from people like me who are highly tuned into power socially and either go first or last nearly all the time regardless of who.

Hmm, if men and women are to be equal, doesn't this mean the gentleman must die and also the lady?
Those two charactateurs seem to perpetuate the inequality through everyday actions.
And if I look at the history of movies, I might think that Black Swans comments ring true. I haven't seen a man lay down his coat to cover a puddle of water, so a woman can walk across, in a long long time.

I guess one stage still to hit the mainstream in earnest is the idea of transexual.
Don't ask me who should get on the bus first in that scenario lol
But thinking about it, it does highlight a small bit of my prejudice.
In that I believe I am indeed more likely to let a female figure ahead of me than a male figure.

Before I end it there. I would also like to mention a small thing I noticed among dogs. what relevance I will let others decide....
From what I have experienced, amongst dogs, the female nearly always gets first dibs(apart from food wars).
Water, the best seat, the best toy etc.. The female dogs frommy experience have generally been dominant in those areas and not jusy by strength. I have seen picture are large male dogs sleeping in a tiny basked 1/3 their size, while the tiny female dog has the large bed. Funny, but to me it points at something in nature.
Something us humans might have as well, through the evolution of society and families.
So maybe we are built to be "sexist" and feminism is a dismantling of an evolutionary mechanic.
Or since society evolved(albeit I would say under the Iron hand of a small few) to seek equality, it is mostly a part of our cultural evolution anyway.

Personally I am not sure on the last part. Maybe it's inevitable.
But I also hold some weight to the idea that feminism was not started to liberate women, but to destroy the american family unit and create 50% more workforce.

Is there a word for the male version of feminism? I should know it right?
Do people think that the overshadowing of feminism has caused men to lose more? Or have women just gained what they should always have and men are suffering equality and cultural disonance.

Black Swan · 05-11-2014 9:03pm

Torakx wrote: »

Do people think that the overshadowing of feminism has caused men to lose more?

I do not see feminism, even during its past radical waves, as "overshadowing" men. A perspective had its place in the light, was shared, disputed, modified, and has now been largely integrated into a larger diversity perspective.

What did men "lose?" That depends upon your past and present perspectives of interrelationships with women. Men may have gained. Do you enjoy the company of better educated, more self-actualized women, who have more choices to make when determining their careers, partners, and associated roles in society? Just think. If they are indeed more independent, and they choose to be with you, rather than another, is that more gratifying for a man?

Torakx · 05-11-2014 11:07pm

I personally think there are not enough self actualized women or men about these days and it is a frustrating and lonely a place generally speaking because of that.
But I do think there is a change of power in process and this whole system of governance and culture is based somewhat on the premise that we are not equal.
I suppose the fall of religion is one big reason for this liberation.
And because we no longer require hunters and gatherers like we used to, it is an obvious progression.

I suppose when I talk about loss for men, I should be more precise.
Maybe I mean a loss of recognition(i was picturing war as one area where many men have been sacrificed in place of women and children).

But on writing this I have more thoughts that counter my original intuitions.
Maybe the reason for all these wars and deaths of men around the world in massive numbers is due to the same premise that women are or have been liberated from.
That is if these warring tycoon families that rule the world are run by men and their societies with secrets, who are notorious for a separation of sexes.

Regarding my comments on war and men, I dorealise the issues with that, or at least a few.
One being that women may not have been allowed to fight had they wished to and so who else is going to die for their betters? It must be men.

I hold no convictions anyway. It's an interesting topic and my mind changes often enough I don't try to keep up

mrkiscool2 · 06-11-2014 12:09am

Black Swan wrote: »

I do not see feminism, even during its past radical waves, as "overshadowing" men. A perspective had its place in the light, was shared, disputed, modified, and has now been largely integrated into a larger diversity perspective.

What did men "lose?" That depends upon your past and present perspectives of interrelationships with women. Men may have gained. Do you enjoy the company of better educated, more self-actualized women, who have more choices to make when determining their careers, partners, and associated roles in society? Just think. If they are indeed more independent, and they choose to be with you, rather than another, is that more gratifying for a man?

I can completely see where the OP is coming from in relation to "have men lost something". And I think they have. They've definitely lost the ability to be not all be seen as rapists by a random women on the street, they've lost the ability to be able to want a certain type of woman unless he is into BBW's (nothing wrong with that by the way, but the fact a man gets judged on what he prefers look wise in a woman is a problem), they are seen as potential paedophiles, abusers and a lot of other negative things. And that's definitely a loss.

First and Second Wave feminism have done remarkable things for people in the first world. Women are, as you pointed out, better educated, more independent and make choices that do not directly relate to men. And I'm all for that. But third wave feminism is absolute poison. When a man can be judged for just being a man surely there is a problem there?

Torakx · 06-11-2014 12:52am

Hmm there is some amount of stigma regarding men and children generally. Men are seen as less able to take care of children. Maybe it is true generally, but then I don't think we are all equal and not even considering male or female in that area, but it does seem that society considers male or female as a factor in ability to mind a child.
I know there is a movement going for a good few years, trying to help fathers see their children after separating from their partner and losing custody.
I haven't researched it enough to make an opinion on that though.
I would like to think that society these days acknowledges that women are as likely to be abusers as men. But I don't have any clue on how much the general public have been programmed/educated.

A small adendum to the topic of men caring for children. I think that both men and women can have a male or female mind.
I have seen women whoare very much for the managers position, strict and controlling, much like a dominant male. I also see traits in some men, where they have somuch empathy and other good qualities associated with the female side.
So in my view I do not see us all equal there. I think the female mind is more likely to be a good carer and the male type of mind is more likely to be an active force. But very generally ... I myself have more of a female mind(right brain dominant) and so I hold many of those qualities, but not sure I have the patience of a good carer! So not all black and white.

Black Swan · 06-11-2014 9:44am

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

When a man can be judged for just being a man surely there is a problem there?

Not sure what you mean by "just being a man." Specific examples?

Torakx wrote: »

I have seen women whoare very much for the managers position, strict and controlling, much like a dominant male.

I find this choice of words unfortunate: "women whoare" in contrast to "dominant male."

Torakx wrote: »

So in my view I do not see us all equal there. I think the female mind is more likely to be a good carer and the male type of mind is more likely to be an active force.

Not sure how much of this behaviour used here to differentiate between females and males can be attributed to upbringing and cultural stereotyping; i.e., suggests the nature vs nurture argument?

Torakx wrote: »

But very generally ... I myself have more of a female mind(right brain dominant) and so I hold many of those qualities, but not sure I have the patience of a good carer!

To what extent are these "right brain dominant" references metaphors used to foster discussion, but as Gareth Morgan suggests in Images of Organization are distortions of reality?

The Corinthian · 06-11-2014 9:51am

Black Swan wrote: »

What did men "lose?" That depends upon your past and present perspectives of interrelationships with women. Men may have gained. Do you enjoy the company of better educated, more self-actualized women, who have more choices to make when determining their careers, partners, and associated roles in society? Just think. If they are indeed more independent, and they choose to be with you, rather than another, is that more gratifying for a man?

Sorry, but that's nonsense.

One thing that seems to be quietly ignored by feminism is that the patriarchal system was not simply some simplistic model whereby men had all the privileges and women had none. Certainly women were overall disadvantaged in terms of rights, but that does not mean they had none.

Womens' role as child barer and the prejudice that they were effectively classified somewhere between children and men meant that they had certain privileges, such as the famous 'women and children first' where men were expected to sacrifice themselves in favour of women. It also meant that women were not fully considered culpable for their actions, thus leading to more lenient sentences than men for the same crimes.

Early feminism recognised this; it saw that the patriarchal system was not simply one way and if one wanted equality women too needed to abandon privlages that were part of that system, just as men do.

But that's not what happened in the end. Men have had those patriarchal privileges stripped, but women have managed to retain almost all of theirs. Indeed, modern feminism not only ignores this cake and eat it approach to reform, but has in some cases even sought to exasperate it, such as in the movement that seeks to abolish custodial sentences for women.

So yes, men have lost a lot in the name of 'equality'. It had to happen if we were to achieve this, but it's been one way as women have essentially not done the same leaving us in a situation whereby men almost certainly have fewer rights in modern Western society to women.

So claiming that men have gained because we have the company of better conversationalists and we should be happy about the imbalance is really taking the piss, TBH.

Black Swan · 06-11-2014 10:36am

The Corinthian wrote: »

So claiming that men have gained because we have the company of better conversationalists and we should be happy about the imbalance is really taking the piss, TBH.

Your words, not mine. It's unfortunate that women's relatively recent growth and advancement as partners with men in western society can be so pejoratively and simply treated in your concluding statement as "better conversationalists:" a limited perspective that I do not share. So we can agree to disagree in both spirit and intent, and leave it at that.

The Corinthian · 06-11-2014 10:56am

Black Swan wrote: »

Your words, not mine. It's unfortunate that women's relatively recent growth and advancement as partners with men in western society can be so pejoratively and simply treated in your concluding statement as "better conversationalists:" a limited perspective that I do not share. So we can agree to disagree in both spirit and intent, and leave it at that.

Disagree? You actually just completely ignored the point I made using the expression I used (which I did so purposely so as to underline how ridiculous it was) as a pretext to do so.

Torakx · 06-11-2014 3:38pm

Black Swan wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by "just being a man." Specific examples?

I find this choice of words unfortunate: "women whoare" in contrast to "dominant male."

Not sure how much of this behaviour used here to differentiate between females and males can be attributed to upbringing and cultural stereotyping; i.e., suggests the nature vs nurture argument?

To what extent are these "right brain dominant" references metaphors used to foster discussion, but as Gareth Morgan suggests in Images of Organization are distortions of reality?

Hmm not sure what you find unfortunate about that choice of words.
Unless you mean a freudian slip? in which case I would tell you my spacebar is broken and I often miss spaces lol

In my view some people regardless of sex are more or less aggressive than others in certain areas, often these people will seek managerial type jobs, to give a small example. The doers, active and aggressive. Organised, keeps lists etc.
Many of the people I know in this position and have a partner at home or working, be they male or female, tend to be the dominant force in the relationship, in some ways anyway. There are personalities toaccount for and upbringing as well.
To say there is no force between people relating to power, I think is to deny being human.
But it is true, this whole left right brain thing is not fully understood by scientists. I use left right brain as a symbol I guess. a feeling about people regarding the way they behave and think, which seems to correlate to the workings of the left and right brain.
An example of left and right brain traits in relation to random thinking.

The left side in the common brain type, is used for linear random thinking, which is effective in finding random memories locally for want of a better description.
The right brains random thinking is global and reaches across most of the brain, but is not linear like the left side. It branches out much more.
Soboth left and right brain dominant people can be highly creative. However there is a difference.
These differences piled up together between the left and right functions of the brain is what I would call left and right brain dominance. For noone uses just one side. Apparently Da Vinchi was 100% right, but I call bull on that one lol
Anyway the left brain dominants are usually good at managerial jobs. They can be male or female, it is the brain functions thatcount.

When I speak of the male and female brain I am using the mystics version or whatever culture decided female was the right side and male was those left functions. They seem to be very mixed among people and I would say the symbol representations of left and right to these mystics or whoever, was purely symbolic and refers to the overall traits of older traditional views of men and women applied to functions of left and right brain.
Soon we may not be able to say male or female brain and maybe I am presumptious to use that phrase, if both are the same, then it is just brain with different traits and I willneed helpnaming them if I am not to be mistaken as sexist by saying male and female brain ^^
To say I have a female brain and point at my empathy, might be tosay other men with a male brain have less empathy... but to be honest, I would say this is possibly true...
Empathy is a skill. And it seems to be stronger in those with a "female brain" or "right brain dominant"

Sorry that might all seem like a load of waffle.. Not sure If I made much clear there haha
It might be easier when talking about sexism, to stop using male and female brain, and just stick with left and right brain dominance respectively.
I came originally from a Jungian perspective. It might have been through his books I came across the ideas in ancient man about the male and female brain.

Torakx · 06-11-2014 3:47pm

Black Swan wrote: »

Not sure how much of this behaviour used here to differentiate between females and males can be attributed to upbringing and cultural stereotyping; i.e., suggests the nature vs nurture argument?

Sorry just to be clear. I mean male and female brain types. Not actual males and females.
Example i have a predominantly female brain type, but I am a male and I am seen as very masculine among others. It is not todowith sex or culture, but functioning of the brain.
But i will try not use female or male brain types as I mentioned above.

Black Swan · 13-11-2014 7:11am

Torakx wrote: »

But it is true, this whole left right brain thing is not fully understood by scientists. I use left right brain as a symbol I guess. a feeling about people regarding the way they behave and think, which seems to correlate to the workings of the left and right brain.

There is no (recent) valid and reliable empirical evidence to suggest that the left brain-right brain theory has merit, or the associated brain dominance (left analytical; right artistic) schemes. Quite to the contrary, based upon a recent study of 1,000 brain scans, both creativity and analytical thinking were manifest through the interaction of all brain regions found in both hemispheres. Examined were 7,000 brain regions that included both hemispheres, and they "were essentially equal in their neural networks and connectivity," consequently no left or right brain dominance or specialisation in terms of analytical thinking or artistic behaviour by side existed.

Awhile back I had read in a popular psychology magazine that males were generally more left brain analytical dominant, and females were generally more right brain artistic dominant, which, given the recent empirical evidence, would suggest this scheme was in error (and perhaps an example of subtle sexism).

Torakx · 13-11-2014 5:45pm

My views are often confused on this matter. Especially in the pschology forum

But it's more to do with my inability to explain things concisely.

The left side apparently has a diferent type of random thinking(creativity).
I only know this from watching a documentary on creativity. I think it was on BBC.
Anyway, to me this shows there is a difference between the left and right brain(My own theory is that logic also works in a similar way). And I believe that either male or female can have a left or right brain "dominance".

There are different test you can do to check.
A visual one which tells you which side of the visual cortex you prefer.
There is a preference for left of right hand/feet. And I am sure a preference for logic too.

I found the documentary ^^

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1gn21d_bbc-documentary-horizon-the-creative-brain-how-insight-works_lifestyle

15 mins in it goes into the brain functions. i can't find the part where it explains the difference between left and right, but i am sure it was thatdocumentary I saw it in.

When I say i have a female brain, i don't mean I am thinking like a female, or i am gay, or I am a woman inside. Just that I have more of an alignment with the symbolic female brain,aka the right side in most people.
Actual sex has nothing to do with it in my view.
I dont often say right side, because in some people it is not located in the right side. So I use the ancient term male and female brain.

Black Swan · 13-11-2014 6:32pm

Torakx wrote: »

The left side apparently has a diferent type of random thinking(creativity).

Once again, the left brain-right brain theory has not been receiving recent empirical support. There appears to be specialisation that occurs in certain brain centres (e.g., speech, optical, etc.), but left or right hemisphere dominance as pertains to analytical thinking and creativity does not appear to exist for men or women (rather both hemispheres are used by both without dominance), and to suggest that there is a hemispherical brain dominance difference by gender may be an example of sexism.

Torakx · 13-11-2014 9:02pm

Black Swan wrote: »

Once again, the left brain-right brain theory has not been receiving recent empirical support. There appears to be specialisation that occurs in certain brain centres (e.g., speech, optical, etc.), but left or right hemisphere dominance as pertains to analytical thinking and creativity does not appear to exist for men or women (rather both hemispheres are used by both without dominance), and to suggest that there is a hemispherical brain dominance difference by gender may be an example of sexism.

Sorry I think you misunderstand what I meant.
Sex has nothing to do with whether someone will be left or right brain dominant, in my view.
When I use the expression female brain and male brain i mean it purely in an archetypal or maybe symbolic sense. Which may have originated with eastern philosophy?
Maybe that is sexist though. However I don't know of a scientific wording for this, as it is only recently discovered.
There is no label I know of for the right brain creative neuron patterns and the left brain creative neuron patterns.
And science as far as I know has not discovered the analytical/logical version....yet.
But I am willing to bet there is a slightly different right brain logical version too.
Not sure how this would work, because the right side seems to be global with creativity, reaching more pathways across the whole brain. The left is more local and focussed. With logic I am unsure how logic applies in a global sense in the brain. Possibly via another area to process the results.
I think though, I have drifted way off topic lol

I just didn't want people to misunderstand what I mean when saying female brain and male brain.
But it appears there is too much to cover just to clarify that, especially in a thread about sexism! My bad.
I often don't agree with lines drawn on content discussed and can confuse topics too much as I am unable to properly express my meaning.
I will blame dyslexia and as Carl Jung would say, the confusing mind of the intuitive introvert.
According to him, I should just not say anything, because nobody will ever understand what I really am thinking. Seems to be true most of the time.
Hence the overly long posts and digression.

Maybe to keep the topic moving forward and prevent a looping discussion, the thread could be directed towards other areas of sexism and hopefully with lots of philosophy

I find the protest for equal rights regarding the guillotine interesting for a start.
Some of my first thoughts when starting this thread were of wars over the years and how many men have been sacrificed for "progress".
There has been a strong cultural leaning toward having men do all the killing and dying(setting aside innocent casualties).

But now women are allowed to join armies and kill people too(you can tell I am disgusted at the general idea of armies lol), so I do see a move forward with equality.
However, it seems to me that women in general do not seem to want to do the killing. Does this imply a difference between men and women? Or a lingering of culture and inequality in women themselves, so that they do not join?
Or do the armies of the world only allow so many women? It still seems a majority are men and so is unequal.
Opps, one last thing, maybe the numbers ARE equal and I have misled myself there.

Honestly i do find the issue of equality confusing at times.
I am very much introverted and with that seems to come absolute thinking in many areas.
I absolutely hate rules and putting things in boxes. I think life is far too complex to say we are allequal and the rules are far too simple to cover us complex humans.
So I don't see or maybe better to say feel in-equality or equality.
just more rules and complcations when everything is simple. Let everyone do what they want, there we are all equal and different.

Black Swan · 14-11-2014 7:36pm

Torakx wrote: »

When I use the expression female brain and male brain i mean it purely in an archetypal or maybe symbolic sense.

Fair enough. Although the left-brain right-brain theory lacks recent empirical support, it can be used as a metaphor if you wish. But in doing so, keep in mind the cautions suggested by Gareth Morgan regarding metaphors (and similar literary devices): They may be useful to foster discussion, are figurative, but are distortions of reality and cannot be taken literally.

Torakx wrote: »

There is no label I know of for the right brain creative neuron patterns and the left brain creative neuron patterns.

Not sure how this would work, because the right side seems to be global with creativity, reaching more pathways across the whole brain... The left is more local and focussed.

The contemporary brain scan research suggests that both sides are creative, not one or the other (applies to analytical too), consequently no hemisphere dominance by one side, or the other.

Torakx wrote: »

However, it seems to me that women in general do not seem to want to do the killing. Does this imply a difference between men and women? Or a lingering of culture and inequality in women themselves, so that they do not join?

The nature vs nurture argument may apply here to examine if there are natural differences between men and women as pertains to the proclivity towards warlike behaviour, or do they result from nurture (norms, values, upbringing, etc.), or a combination of both? Who knows?

Torakx wrote: »

I absolutely hate rules and putting things in boxes. I think life is far too complex to say we are allequal and the rules are far too simple to cover us complex humans.

Jacques Derrida suggested that nominal categorisation was often an over simplification and distortion of reality due to the complexity of phenomena examined.

Doener5dm · 22-11-2014 7:03am

I don't see it as Feminism. Maybe this phenomen is much due to the personal character. Some people, who are more concerned aout themself, may not behave like you.

braddun · 22-11-2014 7:53am

only if you push them up the steps of the bus

DoYouEvenLift · 22-11-2014 8:12am

Being mannerly and decent to other people isn't sexism. I hold the door open if I see someone is following behind, regardless of whether they're men or women, ugly or goodlooking etc. It's just something you do instinctively because otherwise the door could hit and injure the other person.

When it comes to things like giving up my seat on a bus or train though I'll only happily do that for the elderly or disabled.

sexism?

Comments