"Do men really have it easier?" Washington Post article on 4 transgender guys

iptba

Crossing the divide

Do men really have it easier? These transgender guys found the truth was more complex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feature/crossing-the-divide-do-men-really-have-it-easier-these-transgender-guys-found-the-truth-was-more-complex


I thought this was an interesting article.

johnnyskeleton

iptba wrote: »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feature/crossing-the-divide-do-men-really-have-it-easier-these-transgender-guys-found-the-truth-was-more-complex


I thought this was an interesting article.

Sure is. Particularly good seeing as how the article doesn't come down on one side or the other. It's almost as though life can be just as good or as bad as you and your circumstances make it, regardless of your gender!

The impacts on testosterone treatment on personality are the most interesting observations for me. I remember a podcast a few years ago when a trans person was saying that after testosterone treatments, they were unable to resist staring at women on the street. In their head, they were still a feminist and found that behaviour highly offensive, but having the full flow of male hormones without years of being forced to reign it in was overpowering for them. A similar observation was made here, that one person found they were less tolerant to extraneous material and wanted direct answers to questions.

Whatever about the suggestion that there are innate biological differences or sociological reasons why men and women behave differently, the fact that testosterone can produce such dramatic personality changes (and in more extreme examples, the body builders having the 'roid rage) is a very interesting observation.

Another thing that struck me was the stuff about basic manners, women expecting him to hold the doors open for them, but not holding them open for him! Think this might have been something of an exaggeration, of the you see what you want to see variety, but it's interesting nonetheless.

However, on the downside, I'm still not convinced about the whole "I transitioned to a man and suddenly everyone respected my opinion, never interrupted me and said my research was way better than my sisters'" type stuff. Maybe everyone would have to live a while as the other gender to fully realise how much their gender plays a part, but I don't believe it. People respect confidence, intelligence and knowledge etc. Maybe a trans person who has transitioned will have more confidence than they had before, so will be more assertive at meetings.

In any event, the big problem with all of these things is that they are autoethnography rather than empirical studies. Taking a person's anecdotes, theorising as to why they happened and then extrapolating them to general observations of society is fun, but it's not exactly a reliable way to examine the world. Sadly these types of things, together with dubious statistics, are the mainstay of modern sociological thought!

Wibbs

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

However, on the downside, I'm still not convinced about the whole "I transitioned to a man and suddenly everyone respected my opinion, never interrupted me and said my research was way better than my sisters'" type stuff. Maybe everyone would have to live a while as the other gender to fully realise how much their gender plays a part, but I don't believe it. People respect confidence, intelligence and knowledge etc. Maybe a trans person who has transitioned will have more confidence than they had before, so will be more assertive at meetings.

To be fair one guy did address this: "When I gave presentations I was brighter, funnier, more engaging. Not because I was a man. Because I was happy.".

H3llR4iser

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The impacts on testosterone treatment on personality are the most interesting observations for me. I remember a podcast a few years ago when a trans person was saying that after testosterone treatments, they were unable to resist staring at women on the street. In their head, they were still a feminist and found that behaviour highly offensive, but having the full flow of male hormones without years of being forced to reign it in was overpowering for them. A similar observation was made here, that one person found they were less tolerant to extraneous material and wanted direct answers to questions.

Whatever about the suggestion that there are innate biological differences or sociological reasons why men and women behave differently, the fact that testosterone can produce such dramatic personality changes (and in more extreme examples, the body builders having the 'roid rage) is a very interesting observation.

The testosterone influence on behavior is indeed massive and almost always dismissed as "excuses". I've knows a girl who was very much into body building a few years ago, and one of the things she admitted candidly was that during "bulk up" periods she became more or less a nymphomaniac :P

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Another thing that struck me was the stuff about basic manners, women expecting him to hold the doors open for them, but not holding them open for him! Think this might have been something of an exaggeration, of the you see what you want to see variety, but it's interesting nonetheless.

I can actually testify to that, because I've observed it firsthand.

A few years ago I used to work in an office that had an absolute sh1tload of corridors and fire doors, with some ~500 people working in it. So every time you walked to the canteen, a meeting room or the toilette you went through a few doors with other people. Without dancing around the issue, women would more or less systematically slam the door in guys faces, unless they knew you personally or were in your own team. In most cases, they wouldn't even look behind - basically not caring at all; Some would actually see you coming and still slam the door (especially if they came from some specific countries in continental Europe, let's put it that way...).

Men would always look behind them to check if someone else was coming through and most of the times hold the door, be it for women or other guys.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

However, on the downside, I'm still not convinced about the whole "I transitioned to a man and suddenly everyone respected my opinion, never interrupted me and said my research was way better than my sisters'" type stuff. Maybe everyone would have to live a while as the other gender to fully realise how much their gender plays a part, but I don't believe it. People respect confidence, intelligence and knowledge etc. Maybe a trans person who has transitioned will have more confidence than they had before, so will be more assertive at meetings.

In any event, the big problem with all of these things is that they are autoethnography rather than empirical studies. Taking a person's anecdotes, theorising as to why they happened and then extrapolating them to general observations of society is fun, but it's not exactly a reliable way to examine the world. Sadly these types of things, together with dubious statistics, are the mainstay of modern sociological thought!

Wibbs wrote: »

To be fair one guy did address this: "When I gave presentations I was brighter, funnier, more engaging. Not because I was a man. Because I was happy.".

The way I see this is the one Wibbs is outlining - I don't really detect any "See? People are good to me now because I'm a lad!"; On the contrary, they look at the situation and realize "people act different with me because my own attitude has done a 180 degree turn".

The most interesting "episode" narrated in the article I'd say it's the first guys (Trystan) experience with the student coming on to him - it really hit him in the face that, while looking like a woman, he was immediately offered support and an escort; As a man, he was basically told "aren't you happy about it?", even if the whole situation could have landed him in jail for no reason at all...

iptba

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In any event, the big problem with all of these things is that they are autoethnography rather than empirical studies. Taking a person's anecdotes, theorising as to why they happened and then extrapolating them to general observations of society is fun, but it's not exactly a reliable way to examine the world. Sadly these types of things, together with dubious statistics, are the mainstay of modern sociological thought!

It is a pity there are not more experimental studies in gender studies. For example, they could have a man and woman give the same comments/suggestions at a meeting and see whether people rated the comments differently or not.

H3llR4iser

iptba wrote: »

It is a pity there are not more experimental studies in gender studies. For example, they could have a man and woman give the same comments/suggestions at a meeting and see whether people rated the comments differently or not.

One problem - is there any interest whatsoever in organizing such experiments in a clean and honest way, rather than one that suffers from confirmation bias? And most importantly, would there be any openness to their result, should they not be what the "mainstream" wants to hear? I very highly doubt so; Consider how much fanfare there is about the "pay gap", with plenty of faulty or knowingly incorrect data used as a backup to prove the point.


For example, would your example above be run in different settings? The "meeting" scenario is likely to have a very different outcome if it's set say, in a construction site office as opposed to a primary school. A lot depends also on the maturity and cultural background of the individuals.

That's why these experiences from people who have seen both sides first hand are actually extremely important; Most of them went in from the perspective of a quite extreme feminist and had to start dealing with reality as a man, while nobody else knew; and they found out that things are quite a bit different from what they were told to believe. In a sense, it IS the purest form of experiment available...

I dunno.... How can someone say what being a man or a woman is like, simply because they changed their gender later on?

I mean, they've missed out on being a teenager and coming to term with the frustrations of their gender, dealing with common (and uncommon) gender roles, attitudes, dating, etc. And while teenage period is frustrating, the 20's is also a very important period to help define your identity as a male, putting away a lot of the baggage of the past.

I don't think getting your gender changed, is enough to know what it's like to be a man or a woman. Yes, there are the biological/chemical differences, but where's the experience/memories? It's too much like changing your clothes to match a foreign nationality/race, and saying your that nationality. You've missed out on the decades of culture, experience, etc. If I get an Afro, get my skin tinted, can I tell everyone I know what it's like to be Jamaican?

H3llR4iser

Deleted User wrote: »

I dunno.... How can someone say what being a man or a woman is like, simply because they changed their gender later on?

I mean, they've missed out on being a teenager and coming to term with the frustrations of their gender, dealing with common (and uncommon) gender roles, attitudes, dating, etc. And while teenage period is frustrating, the 20's is also a very important period to help define your identity as a male, putting away a lot of the baggage of the past.

I don't think getting your gender changed, is enough to know what it's like to be a man or a woman. Yes, there are the biological/chemical differences, but where's the experience/memories? It's too much like changing your clothes to match a foreign nationality/race, and saying your that nationality. You've missed out on the decades of culture, experience, etc. If I get an Afro, get my skin tinted, can I tell everyone I know what it's like to be Jamaican?

I agree totally on that, it wouldn't make you know what it means to be "Jamaican", however you would certainly see a change in attitude in people and how they relate to you; You would most certainly get an idea, a snapshot if you will, of differences there are at a social level being a 30-something black man as opposes to a 30-something white man.

And the whole "how society sees you" is the central point in these guys' experiences. None of them claims to have suddenly learnt the whole book because they look like dudes now; They haven't got the whole "you must be strong, successful, independent, fit, competitive etc." treatment growing up, they haven't got the "if things go wrong, suck it up and pretend it's not an issue" conditioning and they seem to know. They're getting the snapshot from above; they've been thrust in a man's life midway though it, a life that modern feminism told them means basically anything gets handed to them on a "silver platter" for just being a guy.

Surprise, they found out it's not the case; They found out it's a "homo homini lupus" scenario, that great things, money, success and promotions don't just fall from above because you have facial hair and broader shoulders; Perhaps most shockingly, they realized that at the end of the day, they went from being the "victim that needs protection" to the role of the despicable villain in the story, just because they are men now. If that's not a gigantic eye opener when it comes to people who used to be extreme feminists, I don't know what is

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I do some freelance work where I'd often communicate exclusively by e-mail with people not from Ireland, I also have a Gaelic first name. On a couple of occasions those working relationships have gotten more difficult when the client has realised that the bad scrabble hand at the end of the e-mails is actually a woman's name :pac:

I've had similar experiences on forums/social media and what have you over the years. Very obviously female username, I get an awful lot of things explained to me, the tone of disagreement can be a lot more aggressive and dismissive. Neutral username, whole nother thing. Frankly I''ve seen it here too, seven or eight female posters saying the same thing get told flatly told they're wrong, a male poster (usually Wibbs ) says the same thing, and suddenly it's "hmm, interesting point, I suppose it has to do with blah blah blah".

Honestly try it, start a reddit account with the username Mrswhateveryouwant and post as you normally would.

H3llR4iser

Felix Damaged Hunter wrote: »

I do some freelance work where I'd often communicate exclusively by e-mail with people not from Ireland, I also have a Gaelic first name. On a couple of occasions those working relationships have gotten more difficult when the client has realised that the bad scrabble hand at the end of the e-mails is actually a woman's name :pac:

I've had similar experiences on forums/social media and what have you over the years. Very obviously female username, I get an awful lot of things explained to me, the tone of disagreement can be a lot more aggressive and dismissive. Neutral username, whole nother thing. Frankly I''ve seen it here too, seven or eight female posters saying the same thing get told flatly told they're wrong, a male poster (usually Wibbs ) says the same thing, and suddenly it's "hmm, interesting point, I suppose it has to do with blah blah blah".

Honestly try it, start a reddit account with the username Mrswhateveryouwant and post as you normally would.

There's one account on which you are wrong without a doubt: Wibbs is not a mere "male poster", he's more or less a demi-God in here :D:D

But yes, that's where things get interesting - see, I do not disagree with you in the least.

Online, forums & social media...I think they're horrible environments, plain and simple; I wouldn't however disregard them like some pundits want to do, because I firmly believe they are an actual demonstration of what the popular thought is, as Brexit and "President" Trump tell us.

So yeah, I will tell you - there ARE prejudices and preconceptions around women when it comes to work and some general issues. No doubt about it, no point denying.

What I have a problem with is the supposed nature and origin of these; While some are based on pure idiocy, others are unfortunately simply based on people's perception and personal experiences; also, women have just as many prejudices against other women as men do.

The one thing I wish people were a bit more honest about is where are these prejudices coming from; More to the topic, is it really all the men's fault? Or, like most things in life, the truth is more in the 50-50 camp?

johnnyskeleton

Felix Damaged Hunter wrote: »

I've had similar experiences on forums/social media and what have you over the years. Very obviously female username, I get an awful lot of things explained to me, the tone of disagreement can be a lot more aggressive and dismissive. Neutral username, whole nother thing. Frankly I''ve seen it here too, seven or eight female posters saying the same thing get told flatly told they're wrong, a male poster (usually Wibbs ) says the same thing, and suddenly it's "hmm, interesting point, I suppose it has to do with blah blah blah".

That would be brilliant if you could link us that example so that we can see this phenomenon in action.

Wibbs

Felix Damaged Hunter wrote: »

Honestly try it, start a reddit account with the username Mrswhateveryouwant and post as you normally would.

Funny enough EB - and you may remember this - for a few years, back when I was modding PI and the Ladies Lounge I was thought to be a woman by many. I didn't notice much of a difference though when I gave advice in PI it was taken more on board by those that thought I was. I got more appeals to emotion from banned posters, rather than fcuk you! type PM's.

H3llR4iser wrote: »

There's one account on which you are wrong without a doubt: Wibbs is not a mere "male poster", he's more or less a demi-God in here :D:D

*Drinks more ambrosia*. Me earlier.


May not represent reality.

Triceratops Ballet

Wibbs wrote: »

Funny enough EB - and you may remember this - for a few years, back when I was modding PI and the Ladies Lounge I was thought to be a woman by many. I didn't notice much of a difference though when I gave advice in PI it was taken more on board by those that thought I was. I got more appeals to emotion from banned posters, rather than fcuk you! type PM's.

could that not be due to the context of the forum though? if you are perceived to be a woman doing something that is expected of women (giving emotional advice in PI) then you might be taken more seriously. however if you went into the motors or football forum, would it be the same?

My sister is an avid gamer, but for years she didn't do the thing where you play strangers online (forgive my lack of knowledge on the proper terminology I'm not a gamer) because when she did she was inundated with criticism and or sexually suggestive messages, she since re-regged with a gender neutral username and gets none of the same kind of responses. People just respond differently to men and women both IRL and online.

Wibbs

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

could that not be due to the context of the forum though? if you are perceived to be a woman doing something that is expected of women (giving emotional advice in PI) then you might be taken more seriously. however if you went into the motors or football forum, would it be the same?

I frequent the motors forums a fair bit and didn't notice TBH, but your point regarding PI I would agree with. I did notice if I gave advice along the lines of "cop on Ted", or straight out disagreed with another poster I got much more of a "oh my god how could you say that!" from people who thought I was a woman. I remember getting a few PM's from mostly women posters asking me how I "as a woman" could think like that. I usually replied with "funny you say that..." . I was expected to be more caring, less strident.

LostinBlanch

Wibbs wrote: »

*Drinks more ambrosia*. Me earlier.

May not represent reality.

Oh God, he's into anime. :P


Yes I know it's not strictly anime but don't spoil the joke OK?

iptba

I mainly frequent tGC and Wibbs gets a lot more “thanks” than both male and female posters. This is fair enough in my mind as he puts more effort into his posts and the language can be more colorful.

Also I think mods tend to get more thanks than other people.

Anyway my point is than Wibbs is not your average poster so saying people got fewer thanks than him may not prove much.

H3llR4iser

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

could that not be due to the context of the forum though? if you are perceived to be a woman doing something that is expected of women (giving emotional advice in PI) then you might be taken more seriously. however if you went into the motors or football forum, would it be the same?

My sister is an avid gamer, but for years she didn't do the thing where you play strangers online (forgive my lack of knowledge on the proper terminology I'm not a gamer) because when she did she was inundated with criticism and or sexually suggestive messages, she since re-regged with a gender neutral username and gets none of the same kind of responses. People just respond differently to men and women both IRL and online.

Online gaming is a cesspit, straight and simple; It's often used as a consequences-free blow-off valve by the kind of people who really should seek help, and a lot of it. I've been a gamer since I was able to read and type on a Commodore 64 and the number of weird, pedantic, creepy or downright scary people I've met during online games session is beyond worrisome.



Some of these people are able to "hide" behind a mask of normality IRL, but most are the "live in mom's basement with a tinfoil hat on" types; despicable little idiots with a "macho man" persona to fill, whose only goal is to inflict grievance and frustration from behind the shield of a screen, keyboard & joypad. It's not "just" sexism, they'll go after anyone who doesn't fill their "ideal" - it could be gay people, "bronies", foreigners and whatever else really. I've got abusive PMs for simply beating some of these guys in a race, and whenever I had my country of origin displaying (Italy), the message invariably revolved around it.


Unfortunately there seems to be no immediate solution to what is quite frankly a pot of sh1t, I'm really sorry for your sister and essentially all women gamers - we need way more of them, as a wider audience spectrum invariably results in a more extensive variety of game genres, backstories an characters.

johnnyskeleton

iptba wrote: »

I mainly frequent tGC and Wibbs gets a lot more “thanks” than both male and female posters. This is fair enough in my mind as he puts more effort into his posts and the language can be more colorful.

Also I think mods tend to get more thanks than other people.

Anyway my point is than Wibbs is not your average poster so saying people got fewer thanks than him may not prove much.

Leaving aside the issue of thanks, I'd genuinely like to see an example of what electro~bitch was saying that a woman could make point X and be derided for it but when a male poster comes along (not specifically Wibbs but he was selected as an example) people say that's an interesting point.

It would be particularly good to see an example of it on an online forum because it would be more pronounced than in real life because people are relatively anonymous and so don't have particular group friendships etc, and it would also control for factors such as the volume of people's voices.

We would then be left with a position where, if the content was the exact same and the reaction was different, it could be compelling evidence that yes, in fact, posters who are perceived as male are generally treated with more respect than those who are perceived as female.

Triceratops Ballet

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Leaving aside the issue of thanks, I'd genuinely like to see an example of what electro~bitch was saying that a woman could make point X and be derided for it but when a male poster comes along (not specifically Wibbs but he was selected as an example) people say that's an interesting point.

It would be particularly good to see an example of it on an online forum because it would be more pronounced than in real life because people are relatively anonymous and so don't have particular group friendships etc, and it would also control for factors such as the volume of people's voices.

We would then be left with a position where, if the content was the exact same and the reaction was different, it could be compelling evidence that yes, in fact, posters who are perceived as male are generally treated with more respect than those who are perceived as female.

tbf that's easy done, join reddit, make two accounts one called like johnny macho or something, and one called unicorn princess, make the same points in a thread and judge the reactions you get

iptba

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

tbf that's easy done, join reddit, make two accounts one called like johnny macho or something, and one called unicorn princess, make the same points in a thread and judge the reactions you get

I’d like to see more empirical studies like this from gender researchers. Though it could well vary by forum/environment as H3llraiser suggests.

Though unfortunately my confidence in gender researchers to fairly report findings and explore different interpretations is not high.

johnnyskeleton

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

tbf that's easy done, join reddit, make two accounts one called like johnny macho or something, and one called unicorn princess, make the same points in a thread and judge the reactions you get

If it's so easily done, surely there are examples already to hand?

I mean, so much of this stuff is autoethnographic - people use anecdote to back up their points, and if those anecdotes resonate with others, then it must be true.

There's nothing wrong with that type of analysis, so long as you accept its limitations. But you shouldn't base a whole world view on it.

My view is that good and bad personal interactions happen on an almost daily basis to almost everyone. Some people take them to heart more than others. Some people have a preexisting disposition to believe that there is an evil patriarchy out there that is against women. So when you get people who really take these matters to heart, one of those interactions is between a man and a woman and they are already a died in the wool feminist, no wonder they are going to extrapolate from that that what they just experienced was a serious societal problem.

Electro~bitch said she'd seen it here on boards lots of times, that several female avatars would say something and be derided, but a male avatar would be praised for the same thing. I'd like to see that.

At a guess from your respective usernames, I'd assume she is female and that you are male. As tempted as I was to joking say that your point was really interesting and I'd never thought about like that before, I do genuinely want to see some of these examples before I can form a view on whether it happens or not. And since I am not the one who made the assertion that this is what happens, I don't see why I should have to disprove someone else's argument.

Wibbs

iptba wrote: »

I mainly frequent tGC and Wibbs gets a lot more “thanks” than both male and female posters. This is fair enough in my mind as he puts more effort into his posts and the language can be more colorful.

And I can ban people. Just saying like. *keeps eye on Iptba*

iptba wrote: »

I’d like to see more empirical studies like this from gender researchers. Though it could well vary by forum/environment as H3llraiser suggests.

Though unfortunately my confidence in gender researchers to fairly report findings and explore different interpretations is not high.

TBH I would agree with EB on this. Posters that appear to be, or identify as women do tend to get slightly different responses. It depends on the context and subject matter though. It's generally not a big difference, outside of heavily male skewed online competitive environments like gaming that H3llR4iser mentioned, but yeah I would say it was there alright. Like I say when I was gender fluid I did notice a slight difference in approach.

H3llR4iser

Wibbs wrote: »

And I can ban people. Just saying like. *keeps eye on Iptba*

TBH I would agree with EB on this. Posters that appear to be, or identify as women do tend to get slightly different responses. It depends on the context and subject matter though. It's generally not a big difference, outside of heavily male skewed online competitive environments like gaming that H3llR4iser mentioned, but yeah I would say it was there alright. Like I say when I was gender fluid I did notice a slight difference in approach.

Like I said, I think there's merit in it but it will indeed depend on context, and a LOT - the classic "reverse example" I can make, which can be found even in this very specific forum channel, is that about relationship / dating advice, which is one of these where I feel guys often get the though end of the stick, while ladies are let on a bit more lightly.

Leaving aside extreme cases where the poster comes off as a preposterous jerk or a stuck up wagon (ain't I charming!), you see very often some lad or the other coming in and asking for some advice only to be told he is the problem, his attitude, his confidence, his looks and whatnot - basically "suck it up and man up" in a different form. When it is a woman responses tend to be softer, often people try to dig deeper asking for additional information and rarely she gets blasted off with "well, it's you!" - unless it's an absolutely hopeless case.

As for gaming, it's actually more than a "male skewed online competitive environments" I'm afraid, it's literally that it often works as a "gutter" for all of the outsiders of society. I know it sounds horrible, but it is what it is - I've never met so many people with clear troubles in the head department as I've met in online gaming communities; With all the due respect to people suffering from mental ailments, we're not talking about somebody who is "simply" depressed or insecure, we're talking downright dangerous people with an array of issues ranging from rage management to way, way darker stuff.

whatdoicare

https://www.fastcompany.com/40456604/these-women-entrepreneurs-created-a-fake-male-cofounder-to-dodge-startup-sexism

Here's an article I read ages ago about two ladies that created a fake male co founder to get past the walls that their gender threw up at them (including one where an employee deleted some of their business to get back at one because she wouldn't date him :eek:)

There was another one where a journalist pretended to be a woman employee and she him online and his job got infinitely harder to do and her job easier:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/what-happened-when-a-man-signed-work-emails-using-a-female-name-for-a-week_us_58c2ce53e4b054a0ea6a4066?guccounter=1


I have to admit in my own line of work I've been using a neutral name for years to get projects as I was having a pain in the hole of a time trying to pin down people to take me on and even worse, pay me! Anytime a potential employer finds out before he's even seen my work that I'm female, I'm given the "This project wouldn't be suitable for you, I don't think you have enough experience/too much experience/ whatever excuse they can think of!" spin, then come back with a male name and it's all "Welcome aboard!! No need to see the portfolio - your reputation is good enough for me!":mad:

Lash Into The Pints

They're not men. They're women who've had surgery and hormone treatment.

H3llR4iser

H3llR4iser wrote: »

As for gaming, it's actually more than a "male skewed online competitive environments" I'm afraid, it's literally that it often works as a "gutter" for all of the outsiders of society. I know it sounds horrible, but it is what it is - I've never met so many people with clear troubles in the head department as I've met in online gaming communities; With all the due respect to people suffering from mental ailments, we're not talking about somebody who is "simply" depressed or insecure, we're talking downright dangerous people with an array of issues ranging from rage management to way, way darker stuff.

Ahh well, like yourself I've been involved in gaming since I was a kid, and have continued that into my 40s. Highly unlikely ever to find a reason to stop TBH, and I've always had a particular interest in the mmo's or mmporgs. Not terribly fussed with the console generation online gaming... and that's the major area of nutjobs.

The internet because of its identity "shield" allows people to behave in myrid ways that they wouldn't normally do otherwise. Hence you get the Aholes in droves, the players whose only vocabulary is sexual and usually related to some family member. Or the creepy players who seem to be tracking and stalking you which has become more of an issue as time has passed both due to membership requirements but also our own presence on the internet (SM, particularly Facebook with their dodgy privacy laws)

Note though that I said players. Are they likely to be males? Probably... but only so many more males tend to be interested in gaming than females. Although there are no real numbers or proper research into this (I'm avoiding the research that wants to link gaming with mass murder, or rapists). Lots of stereotypes and assumptions though.

And the ages do range from young to elderly. I've known players who were in their 80s, still playing Call of Duty or DAOC. Just as I know a group of players who started when they were 12 ish and are now 37ish.

Gaming attracts the weirdo's and nutjobs, but then so too does everything. I've met so many weirdos while doing any activity especially ones which allow people to limit actual contact with other people. Book sharing organisations attract some dire people. "Martial arts" has it's share of nutjobs both male and female. Etc. Especially when you travel and continue doing that activity. The internet gaming just gives you access to those people all the time.

johnnyskeleton

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH I would agree with EB on this. Posters that appear to be, or identify as women do tend to get slightly different responses. It depends on the context and subject matter though. It's generally not a big difference, outside of heavily male skewed online competitive environments like gaming that H3llR4iser mentioned, but yeah I would say it was there alright. Like I say when I was gender fluid I did notice a slight difference in approach.

I've no doubt they do. People change what they say and how they say it depending on their audience. Nothing wrong with that.

Do you agree with her controversial view though, i.e. that a female avatar could say something and be dismissed, only for a male avatar to repeat the same thing and it be lauded for it? If so, do you have any examples of this happening on boards?

Wibbs

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I've no doubt they do. People change what they say and how they say it depending on their audience. Nothing wrong with that.

Do you agree with her controversial view though, i.e. that a female avatar could say something and be dismissed, only for a male avatar to repeat the same thing and it be lauded for it? If so, do you have any examples of this happening on boards?

I suspect not TBH. On Boards anyway, I would say other factors like popularity, preconceived notions of a poster(gender could play out there), the thread subject and even how early in a thread the comment is(early ones get the most "thanks") are much more influential.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

*Drinks more ambrosia*. Me earlier.


May not represent reality.

Cape is actually red

Triceratops Ballet

johnnyskeleton wrote:

I've no doubt they do. People change what they say and how they say it depending on their audience. Nothing wrong with that.

Tbh I think if you're as determined to not see a problem as "feminist conspiracy theorists" are to see a problem, then you're both mistaken to an extent. The real size of the issue is probably somewhere between what both camps think ie somewhere between zero on off the charts.

johnnyskeleton

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Tbh I think if you're as determined to not see a problem as "feminist conspiracy theorists" are to see a problem, then you're both mistaken to an extent. The real size of the issue is probably somewhere between what both camps think ie somewhere between zero on off the charts.

I'm not determined to see anything. I just want to be presented with the evidence, so to speak, so that I can make my own mind up. But yeah, the default seems to be that if you can't immediately see, understand and agree 100% with what the feminist claims to be the problem, then it's you that is wrong, not the feminist!

Triceratops Ballet

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I'm not determined to see anything. I just want to be presented with the evidence, so to speak, so that I can make my own mind up. But yeah, the default seems to be that if you can't immediately see, understand and agree 100% with what the feminist claims to be the problem, then it's you that is wrong, not the feminist!

That's not what I said at all!

Potatoeman

whatdoicare wrote: »

I have to admit in my own line of work I've been using a neutral name for years to get projects as I was having a pain in the hole of a time trying to pin down people to take me on and even worse, pay me! Anytime a potential employer finds out before he's even seen my work that I'm female, I'm given the "This project wouldn't be suitable for you, I don't think you have enough experience/too much experience/ whatever excuse they can think of!" spin, then come back with a male name and it's all "Welcome aboard!! No need to see the portfolio - your reputation is good enough for me!":mad:

For projects, I know some PM’s and depending on the deadlines and consequences of missing them they won’t hire women due to women taking more sick days and working less overtime. Bigger companies can absorb these costs but smaller and more specialized ones won’t. It may not seem fair but if it’s costing people money they will avoid it at all cost.

Potatoeman

Wibbs wrote: »

Funny enough EB - and you may remember this - for a few years, back when I was modding PI and the Ladies Lounge I was thought to be a woman by many. I didn't notice much of a difference though when I gave advice in PI it was taken more on board by those that thought I was. I got more appeals to emotion from banned posters, rather than fcuk you! type PM's.


May not represent reality.

The RI and PI does have some noticeable doubles standards. I remember another poster pointing out the double stand where a woman would post “I think this guy might be a player” and the advice would be “dump him he’s a time waster that can’t be trusted” where a man would post “This girl has a very high number of sexual partners in her past” and the reaction would be “How dare you judge her, her past is none of your business”. In fairness when it was highlighted posters did see the double standard and thought they shouldn’t judge the guy either. Though I’m not sure how good this advise is. Judging if someone is right for you is your own choice.

donaldtramp

I don't believe that a 'transgender' is a good case study. They haven't fully experienced both sides of the spectrum. They've maybe experienced a 'fake' social response to their so-called gender, but at the end of the day it's not the same, and as such they're not qualified to talk about the divide.

Even still, the content of the article, or more so the core idea, is fascinating.

whatdoicare

Potatoeman wrote: »

For projects, I know some PM’s and depending on the deadlines and consequences of missing them they won’t hire women due to women taking more sick days and working less overtime. Bigger companies can absorb these costs but smaller and more specialized ones won’t. It may not seem fair but if it’s costing people money they will avoid it at all cost.

Why would I take more sick days than a man? That doesn't make sense.

You can't say maternity leave because men are entitled to paternity leave now too.

I work lots of overtime, especially coming up to deadlines when I would typically be coming home very late and starting early next day and weekends. I also have a child and a husband.

None of what you say makes sense, it's just stereotypes that you've bought into.

donaldtramp

whatdoicare wrote: »

Why would I take more sick days than a man? That doesn't make sense.

You can't say maternity leave because men are entitled to paternity leave now too.

I work lots of overtime, especially coming up to deadlines when I would typically be coming home very late and starting early next day and weekends. I also have a child and a husband.

None of what you say makes sense, it's just stereotypes that you've bought into.

Woman mind the kids. It's statistically more likely that they'll be at home. And maternity leave is longer than paternity leave....

whatdoicare

donaldtramp wrote: »

Woman mind the kids. It's statistically more likely that they'll be at home. And maternity leave is longer than paternity leave....

Don't be thick, this isn't the 1950s. Women typically leave their children with a minder or creche unless it's finacially unviable and even then if the partner/husband is making less they are the ones to stay home. More stereotypical bs.

Paternity leave will soon be an interchangable thing but still a man can take a few months off work paternity leave and he's legally protected, same as a woman - so my point stands.

donaldtramp

whatdoicare wrote: »

Don't be thick, this isn't the 1950s. Women typically leave their children with a minder or creche unless it's finacially unviable and even then if the partner/husband is making less they are the ones to stay home. More stereotypical bs.

Paternity leave will soon be an interchangable thing but still a man can take a few months off work paternity leave and he's legally protected, same as a woman - so my point stands.

So you're telling me that on average, woman and men spend the same amount of hours in work?

Look at the statistics.
You're sounding like a delusional feminist.

whatdoicare

donaldtramp wrote: »

So you're telling me that on average, woman and men spend the same amount of hours in work?

Look at the statistics.
You're sounding like a delusional feminist.

Okay, I went and had a looksee at the statistics - and yes Irish women in the workforce is at 3 out of 5 or 64.5% but it is suggested that this is because women are not facilitated properly in the workforce (I have a feeling that not gaining employment or promotions because of males deciding that they'll be sick and off alot has something to do with that one) whereas in places like Sweden and Iceland it's at 9 out of 10 or 98% because attitudes are different and women don't face this prejudice.

So there you go. They have longer maternity leave there too - which is amazing!

donaldtramp

whatdoicare wrote: »

Okay, I went and had a looksee at the statistics - and yes Irish women in the workforce is at 3 out of 5 or 64.5% but it is suggested that this is because women are not facilitated properly in the workforce (I have a feeling that not gaining employment or promotions because of males deciding that they'll be sick and off alot has something to do with that one) whereas in places like Sweden and Iceland it's at 9 out of 10 or 98% because attitudes are different and women don't face this prejudice.

So there you go. They have longer maternity leave there too - which is amazing!

Please stop trying to look for something which doesn't exist. Why should we model all our laws based off other countries? Woman are severely oppressed in a lot of other countries.

Why can't we just be happy with the amazing country we live in. For god sake, everyone's always trying to take issue.

whatdoicare

donaldtramp wrote: »

Please stop trying to look for something which doesn't exist. Why should we model all our laws based off other countries? Woman are severely oppressed in a lot of other countries.

Why can't we just be happy with the amazing country we live in. For god sake, everyone's always trying to take issue.

Are you serious?? I told you I have to have a neutral name to get work - and you're telling me I should just be happy because I don't have to wear a burka is it? Yes, we should model our laws off countries that are getting it right. Otherwise Ireland would still be in the dark ages. We must always strive to better our country.

donaldtramp

whatdoicare wrote: »

Are you serious?? I told you I have to have a neutral name to get work - and you're telling me I should just be happy because I don't have to wear a burka is it? Yes, we should model our laws off countries that are getting it right. Otherwise Ireland would still be in the dark ages. We must always strive to better our country.

Yeah, you're right, lets go ahead an copy Sweden! They are a perfect example of a great country! You know..... With all them ISIS attacks they sure know how to run a country.

Potatoeman

whatdoicare wrote: »

Why would I take more sick days than a man? That doesn't make sense.

You can't say maternity leave because men are entitled to paternity leave now too.

I work lots of overtime, especially coming up to deadlines when I would typically be coming home very late and starting early next day and weekends. I also have a child and a husband.

None of what you say makes sense, it's just stereotypes that you've bought into.

It’s statistics, this was what the gender pay gap was called out on. Women on average work less overtime and take more sick days before you factor in maternity leave. You may be an exception but people will make judgments based on past experiences.

donaldtramp

Potatoeman wrote: »

It’s statistics, this was what the gender pay gap was called out on. Women on average work less overtime and take more sick days before you factor in maternity leave. You may be an exception but people will make judgments based on past experiences.

Agreed. And although it's "illegal" to hire a man over a woman, I would personally find it to be logical.

You have 2 candidates who are both equally fit for a job.

The man is much more likely to consistently turn up for work, and the woman is less likely to work overtime and more likely to take sick days off.