A Womans Place - The search for Equality.

ferdi

ok before i'm shot let me say i'm not a big sexist bastard (a big sexy bastard maybe )

Most of the prominent areas of life are male dominated - Politics, Business, Music, Sport etc. Why?

I dont know the answer but I can only really think of three possibilities - Constructed(1), Natural(2) or Illusionary(3).

Argument 1: We live in a patriarchal world in which men opress and objectify women through constrictive social devices.

Argument 2: The natural state of the Female sex is a more passive one than the Male.

Argument 3: These so called prominent areas of life are not, in reality, important and women infact carry the most significant roles in our society.


This thread has probably been done to death but alas, no search function.

Zombrex

ferdi wrote:

ok before i'm shot let me say i'm not a big sexist bastard (a big sexy bastard maybe )

Most of the prominent areas of life are male dominated - Politics, Business, Music, Sport etc. Why?

I dont know the answer but I can only really think of three possibilities - Constructed(1), Natural(2) or Illusionary(3).

Argument 1: We live in a patriarchal world in which men opress and objectify women through constrictive social devices.

Argument 2: The natural state of the Female sex is a more passive one than the Male.

Argument 3: These so called prominent areas of life are not, in reality, important and women infact carry the most significant roles in our society.


This thread has probably been done to death but alas, no search function.

The first one because of the second one ...

patchouli

Is this for an essay / thesis ?

ferdi

patchouli wrote:

Is this for an essay / thesis ?

na, just for sh!ts and giggles:)

AARRRGH

Do you ever notice how many "middle managers" are female? Lots!

I think women are beginning to get the upper hand...

simu

Nah, it's pretty sweet being a woman... now Spock's much harder to find. o_O

Zombrex

dublindude wrote:

Do you ever notice how many "middle managers" are female?

More than men or just "lots"?

:rolleyes:

Eoin

ferdi wrote:

Most of the prominent areas of life are male dominated - Politics, Business, Music, Sport etc. Why?

Music: do you mean artists or in the business end of it? I really can't think of a reason why male artists would be more popular than female artists - I would think this is very much an equal opportunity area. However, I would think that 99% of my music collection is of make artists. Don't know why that is, I would hope it's not for any negative reasons... If you mean the production side of things, then I guess that falls under the business topic.

Sports: I hate to say it, but men are generally better at sports. I prefer to watch womens' tennis, but for the reason that they can't hit the ball as hard (Williams sisters not included), and therefore there are more rallies etc.

Politics: This is definitely changing, women from the grassroots are coming up through the parties and beginning to take a much larger part in politics. However, due to the nature of the beast this can take a while before it is noticed at higher levels. I hope it is just a matter of time before women take up 50% of the government as they are representing 50% of the population. My only problem would be positive discrimination or quota filling. I genuinely don't like this concept, because IMO the first thing it tells a woman (for this example) is that the primary reason they got the position was because she is a woman. This could lead to the woman having to prove herself even more.

Business: Same as above I think. Again, though this can't happen immediately. It has to happen from the lower levels first and filter upwards.

dublindude wrote:

Do you ever notice how many "middle managers" are female? Lots!

I think women are beginning to get the upper hand...

This is definitely on the increase in IT from my experience. I am trying to find some backup links for this, but according to a lady at work who used to work in HR, the vast majority of complaints about bullying at work were made against women by other women.

One reason you didn't mention is that men are generally more aggressive. This is normally demonstrated by crime statistics, however the notion that men are more inventive / more prone to exploration could also be explained by this.

Zombrex

eoin_s wrote:

One reason you didn't mention is that men are generally more aggressive. This is normally demonstrated by crime statistics, however the notion that men are more inventive / more prone to exploration could also be explained by this.

I don't know if men are more "inventive" than women ( you would have to define inventive first) but I certainly find a lotwomen just don't get computers and programming. I don't mean they can't use a computer but they don't seem as interested in making a computer work, programming it and making it tick. To me it goes back to the toys for big boys thing, men seem to just like playing around with electronic stuff (or stuff in general) more than women. The vast majority of women I meet in IT do it as a job not cause they like "nerdy" things (not always true, I know a few nerdy women)

Eoin

Wicknight wrote:

I don't know if men are more "inventive" than women ( you would have to define inventive first)

By inventing, I meant the broad area of innovation and invention. Some people would contend that men are more prone to looking outside his boundaries or comfort zone, i.e. one of the (few?) positive outcomes of testosterone.

Wicknight wrote:

but I certainly find a lotwomen just don't get computers and programming. I don't mean they can't use a computer but they don't seem as interested in making a computer work, programming it and making it tick. To me it goes back to the toys for big boys thing, men seem to just like playing around with electronic stuff (or stuff in general) more than women. The vast majority of women I meet in IT do it as a job not cause they like "nerdy" things (not always true, I know a few nerdy women)

I certainly wouldn't class an interest or ability in computers as "toys for boys", that is quite a derogatory intepretation of it in my opinion. I think the toys for boys phrase applies more to useless gadgets to make themselves look more important / affluent etc.

I think the notion that men are naturally better at programming could boil down to the stereotype that men are better at the logic side of things, where women are better at the creative / softer skill areas. The whole right/left side of the brain thing (can't remember which side corresponds to logic/creativity).

I am not too sure if this is the case for other people, but I have to say that in general, the best programmers / computer people I have met are men - and with that, I honestly don't believe that there is ANY sexism involved at this level of the industry (i.e. anyone who is not in management). I believe that women have as much chance of learning IT in college, and from there, gain employment.

simu

Well, women were screwed over for a very long time and until very recently (and still are in many parts of the world) - getting to a fairer balance of power takes time.

I'm wary of people saying that, say, men are better at job X than women and so on, because if you look at other countries or times, you see completely different qualities and aptitudes being ascribed to both sexes. Or in brief, there are a lot of cultural biases out there!

Eoin

simu wrote:

Well, women were screwed over for a very long time and until very recently (and still are in many parts of the world) - getting to a fairer balance of power takes time.

Very true, and I think that women have to give it time, rather than insist on equality through positive discimination.

simu wrote:

I'm wary of people saying that, say, men are better at job X than women and so on, because if you look at other countries or times, you see completely different qualities and aptitudes being ascribed to both sexes. Or in brief, there are a lot of cultural biases out there!

Yes, I am wary of doing the same, and most the comments I made earlier are only meant to refer to my personal experience. However, there are differences between men and women, which can make one gender more suitable for a job than another. Not all of these differences are perpetuated through cultural baises either, they are just basic physiological differences.

Zombrex

eoin_s wrote:

I think the toys for boys phrase applies more to useless gadgets to make themselves look more important / affluent etc.

Which alot of people would classify computers under ... I mean I get as excited as the next guy when a new Gnome version is release, but do I really need it? Nope. Is it great fun downloading and install it? Yup. My love for computers doesn't come from the fact that some computers actually perform useful purposes, it comes from playing around with them, even in a completely useless fashion.

eoin_s wrote:

I think the notion that men are naturally better at programming could boil down to the stereotype that men are better at the logic side of things, where women are better at the creative / softer skill areas. The whole right/left side of the brain thing (can't remember which side corresponds to logic/creativity).

I don't think men are naturally better at programming, but they are naturally more interested in programming (see above) which is more important in my mind. Some of the best computer programmers in the world have been women (including some of the first) but still u don't see women entering the field, not cause they are crap at it but because they are simply not interested in it.

eoin_s wrote:

I am not too sure if this is the case for other people, but I have to say that in general, the best programmers / computer people I have met are men

Well that is kinda cyclical logic since there are not that many women programmers. But if you look at world reknowned programmers, the ones that have actually made a difference, a lot have been women. So i don't think it is fair to say women are crap programmers, only that women on a whole don't seem to be interested in programming. The ones that are tend to excel.

simu

Wicknight wrote:

I don't think men are naturally better at programming, but they are naturally more interested in programming (see above) which is more important in my mind. Some of the best computer programmers in the world have been women (including some of the first) but still u don't see women entering the field, not cause they are crap at it but because they are simply not interested in it.

I think many women just don't see themselves as programmers. If there was a Sex and the City type programme where one of the really glamorous women was a programmer, that might change!

savoyard

ferdi wrote:

Argument 1: We live in a patriarchal world in which men opress and objectify women through constrictive social devices.

Considering women only got the vote in 1918 in Ireland (1973 in Switzerland:eek: ) and that in Ireland for example, a marriage bar in the civil service was in existence until the early seventies (where women had to stop working on marriage) it's not surprising women don't dominate working life. What is amazing is how fast things have been moving. It's only in the last century that we've been allowed go to university. I think its fair to say women have been opressed and objectified through social devices.

The Irish constution even states (article 41)
1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

Recognising the work of women or tying them to the kitchen sink?

ferdi wrote:

Argument 2: The natural state of the Female sex is a more passive one than the Male.

Passive in what way? Less violent? Less pushy? Violence by women is becoming more and more prevalent. I know as many passive men in the workplace as women.

ferdi wrote:

Argument 3: These so called prominent areas of life are not, in reality, important and women infact carry the most significant roles in our society.

"Women's work" has always been devalued.

Women, by and large, have been confined to the home or the caring professions for years.

There simply hasn't been enough time to figure out if gender differences in all areas are due to opression or ability.

It's been a man's world for centuries, give us a chance to catch up:)

Eoin

Wicknight wrote:

I don't think men are naturally better at programming, but they are naturally more interested in programming (see above) which is more important in my mind. Some of the best computer programmers in the world have been women (including some of the first) but still u don't see women entering the field, not cause they are crap at it but because they are simply not interested in it.

Yes, some of the first and best programmers have been women. I am not debating that. I also not saying that there are no good female programmers at all (see your comment in bold below). What I am saying is that there seems to be some proof that men - in general - have better ability to process logic, and this makes it easier for them to be programmers.

Wicknight wrote:

Well that is kinda cyclical logic since there are not that many women programmers. But if you look at world reknowned programmers, the ones that have actually made a difference, a lot have been women. So i don't think it is fair to say women are crap programmers, only that women on a whole don't seem to be interested in programming. The ones that are tend to excel.

I don't think it's fair to say that either, that's why I didn't.

U$ername

I am and will always be sexist.

Which was first: a male nurse or a female doctor?

Nevyn

There have always been male nurses in armies and feild hospitals.

U$ername

So men were nurses first? Why are there more female nurses than male nurses now? Or actually since you brought it up why isnt the male/female ratio of soldiers 50/50?

Zombrex

U$ername wrote:

So men were nurses first? Why are there more female nurses than male nurses now? Or actually since you brought it up why isnt the male/female ratio of soldiers 50/50?

Cause traditionally women were not allowed in modern armies. When they are needed (WW2) or allowed (1981 I think in Ireland) they flooded into the army. But just like male nurses their exists a stereotype that men/women are not suited to this type of work. Which is kinda silly in my view, a person is either good at something or not, their gender has very little to do with that.

Nevyn

Orders of nursing nuns and Florence Nightingale. They made the job respectable.
Up until then a lot of female nurses were the lowest of the low and usual whore that were too old to ply thier trade and were usually drunkards.

Basically the two world wars were great for getting women out and working.
From farmerettes, reporters, working in factories for the war effort during WW1
To WRACs and all the roles woman took up during WW2.

While each war effort got women out working in what was seen as nontraditional roles, but once the war was over and Johnny came home from war Rosie was expected to hand over the rivet gun and go back to tending house.

Yes there were the execption before the during this time usually women who had enough money to never need to marry or had staff to clean her house and mind her children and a husband that did not mind her odd ways.

Not much difference really as things is today.
If you have the money to pay someone to do your womanly duties,
A nanny/childminder/creche and a cleaner you can have children and still
Pursue a career. Which is why a lot of women are choosing not to or are putting off having kids?

How many women even if they don't have kids even if they are in a relationship where they have a higher profile and earn more then the man in thier life still are the on who has to clean the toilet ?

Yes there are jobs that are seen as unfeminine. I have a friend who is a garda
And it is mad the amount of men who are uncomfortable with that.
Any women who is for the most part in a job or a career that is considered
Masculine is seen as less a woman.

Hell when I was in college there was still the notion that the girls doing
Engineering were looking more for there Mrs. then thier BA. That there would
End up marrying a classmate and have kids and ever use thier qualification
And so were wasting a college place that a bloke could have to get a qualification to get a good job to feed his family. This was the attitude from 2 of the lecturers and a lot of the male students and that is less then 10 years ago.

Yes there has been a lot of work towards breaking down gender stereotypes for jobs and careers but there are still a lot of girls out there that are starting secondary school and the likes of Tec graphics and woodwork and engineering are not available in thier School and the sciences and applied maths and physics are seen as 'boys' subjects.
If they don’t have the subjects at junior cert and leaving cert level they will not have the option to a lot of the courses at college level or to even take up an apprenticeship.

It is surprising how girl children see the world around them. I have a 5 year old daughter and while getting on a bus with her she remarked ‘oh look a lady bus driver is the bus driver sick and she is driving the bus for him? ’ Que a chat from the ‘lady’ bus driver explaining that this is her bus and girls can be bus drivers just as good as the men and sometimes better. This is how she saw things and this is with me consciously as a currently full time mother trying to make sure that both my children see that people can be nearly anything they wish so that they don’t get locked into genderised perceptions of what is men’s work and what is women’s work.

As for why are there not a lot of female programmers; yes we need to give children all the options why want and blow away all the gender streaming thinking that is out there
But end of the day men and women are physically different (you may have noticed that  ). Men are usually better and one type of thing and women at another.
Personally I think it is the single minded focus that men can have compared to women’s multitasking that tends make them better programmers.

The same obsessive pursuit that men applied as hunters being used in the pursuit of a single programming goal. Plus men can put in the 18 hour day for they are in a relationship not usually the default person that has to pick up the kids and tend to them after work or stay at home when the kids are sick or care for elderly relatives.

I dont think that is is possible for true equaltiy to happen with out tearing soicety part; but we can endeavour not to limit our children and give them
equal oppertunites to education of all types.

Little boys will tend play with cars and little girls tend to play with dolls;
but they should both be afforded the chance to play with both and they should all be allowed to play with lego and crayons.

Stark

Thaedydal wrote:

Little boys will tend play with cars and little girls tend to play with dolls;
but they should both be afforded the chance to play with both and they should all be allowed to play with lego and crayons.

Generally if you put very young boys and very young girls in a room with lots of toys, the boys will take the "boy" toys and the girls will take the "girl" toys. Like you said in the post, there is a very real difference between boys and girls that you can't ignore.

Thaedydal wrote:

Men are usually better and one type of thing and women at another. Personally I think it is the single minded focus that men can have compared to women’s multitasking that tends make them better programmers.

This is pretty much the reason why men tend to be much better at mathematics. Maths requires a person to single-mindedly obsess over a problem for long stretches.

Passive in what way? Less violent? Less pushy? Violence by women is becoming more and more prevalent. I know as many passive men in the workplace as women.

For years women tended to be more modest and less pushy than men in the workplace. Men tended to put their hands up for promotion whereas women kept their heads down. Many companies now have "women in work" programs which are changing all that by teaching women techniques to get ahead.

AARRRGH

Wicknight wrote:

More than men or just "lots"?

:rolleyes:

LOL, you really are a glass half empty person, aren't you?

PS Stop stalking me and my posts

U$ername

I fail to see how there really is an equality issue any more. Perhaps im not so sexist, more anti-feminist. The reality of the situation is that men or women can now do whatever job they want. However some jobs are just better suited to males or females exclusively.

Im just guessing that after thousands of years of evolution peoples sex has decided which roles they are better suited to. Every daughter was her mothers apprentice, just as every son was his fathers. Who knows? Methinks some thought that a vote for women would put more women in government as opposed to allowing women to vote on the issues rather than the elected representatives.

Im just wondering is there anything directly wrong with the way things are? Equality was found when people realised that aiming at someone elses goalposts may not be the way to go.

savoyard

U$ername wrote:

I fail to see how there really is an equality issue any more.

Im just wondering is there anything directly wrong with the way things are?

Women are underrepresented in almost every part of public life. Political life, business life - it's only now that we are breaking through. The world is run by white men and yes, things do have to change. Female dominated professions tend to be lower paid than men. To reach the top in business, women have to give up the idea of having a family. Look at the top CEOs in the US. For a start, women are in a minority. The second striking thing is while top male ceos generally have a family, the same is not true for female ceos. We still have to make the family or career choice: men don't.

In cultural life also, women are certainly not treated as equals. You only have to read a few posts on this forum to realise that double standards in sexual matters is rampant among young Irish males, that women are judged, for one, on how thin they they are. Good looking women are thick and bitchy - it's only the ugliers ones that have a personality.

Equality is now enshrined in law, but attitudes have still a long way to go. Women in Ireland earn 84% of men's wages. Women in Ireland are still being (illegally) made redundant when they get pregnant. I know male employers reluctant to hire women in their late twenties / early thirties for fear they'll get pregnant (even through it is the State, not them, that pay statutory maternity leave). There is a lot of work to be done in figuring out how to mix pregnancy and work, but the women I work with do not want to give up their jobs forever just because they have children.

Women have been subjugated by men for centuries, mentally and phyically. For centuries we have been told we are too sensitve for important work, or even for study, that our brains couldn't cope with intellectual rigour. Now you're telling me that I'm naturally unable to be good at maths, that men are naturally better at being inventive and cutting edge. Bollocks - its just another way of hanging on to the status quo.

Things are changing, but they are certainly not there yet.

stark wrote:

Many companies now have "women in work" programs which are changing all that by teaching women techniques to get ahead.

Really? Can you name a company in Ireland that does this? I can honestly say I have never heard of one of these programmes, in the UK or Ireland. Neither have I heard any of my friends, who work in a variety of medium and large companies in Ireland and the UK mention these.

Dades

savoyard wrote:

Women are underrepresented in almost every part of public life. Political life, business life - it's only now that we are breaking through.

Do we know for a fact that there are as many women trying to be a part of political or public life? I would hazard a guess there are not. For the reason addressed in your next comment.

savoyard wrote:

To reach the top in business, women have to give up the idea of having a family. Look at the top CEOs in the US. For a start, women are in a minority. The second striking thing is while top male ceos generally have a family, the same is not true for female ceos. We still have to make the family or career choice: men don't.

Isn't this a fact of life? What can anyone do about this? Men can't have children. If a couple want children the woman has to have them. The only discrimination is evolutionary.

savoyard wrote:

I know male employers reluctant to hire women in their late twenties / early thirties for fear they'll get pregnant (even through it is the State, not them, that pay statutory maternity leave).

This also is a fact of life. Whether it's right or wrong it is a factor like any other an employer will consider when choosing a candidate. Short of having "blind" interviews where the age/gender of candidates is withheld it will always be there. (BTW the fear isn't a loss in wages, but in finding a replacement and retraining replacement staff).

savoyard wrote:

There is a lot of work to be done in figuring out how to mix pregnancy and work, but the women I work with do not want to give up their jobs forever just because they have children.

All I see on this thread is problems without solutions.
What exactly do you want the government/corporate sector to do?

Zombrex

dublindude wrote:

LOL, you really are a glass half empty person, aren't you?

I will take that as a "I actually have no idea" ... :rolleyes:

bonkey

Stark wrote:

This is pretty much the reason why men tend to be much better at mathematics.

I thought that women were better at math, except where they grow up in societies which insist that men are better.

i.e. Its a self-fulfilling prophecy - enough people buy into the idea that their belief in it actually lends it truth.

For years, women were taught that they would not be and could not be as good as men at math. When they're not given this negative reinforcement, my understanding was that they turn out to be as good as, if not better than, men.

jc

Eoin

bonkey wrote:

I thought that women were better at math, except where they grow up in societies which insist that men are better.

i.e. Its a self-fulfilling prophecy - enough people buy into the idea that their belief in it actually lends it truth.

For years, women were taught that they would not be and could not be as good as men at math. When they're not given this negative reinforcement, my understanding was that they turn out to be as good as, if not better than, men.

jc

There are some skills that men are generally better at. As cliched as it sounds, men usually find map reading easier, have better spacial awareness and in general their minds seem to cope with programming constructs easier than women's do. (I don't know if maths is explicitly included with this or not).

There certainly are women who exceed in all of these areas, but we are speaking in generalities here

The Athiest wrote:

Do we know for a fact that there are as many women trying to be a part of political or public life? I would hazard a guess there are not.

Actually, according to some women on the radio, there are a good few women entering politics at the local level, and progressing up through the parties. Their experience was that, if anything, the fact that they are female assisted in their progress as there is a desire within these parties to become more balanced.

U$ername wrote:

I fail to see how there really is an equality issue any more. Perhaps im not so sexist, more anti-feminist.

I think you can be pro-equality even if you are anti-feminist.

Sleepy

savoyard wrote:

Women are underrepresented in almost every part of public life. Political life, business life - it's only now that we are breaking through. The world is run by white men and yes, things do have to change. Female dominated professions tend to be lower paid than men. To reach the top in business, women have to give up the idea of having a family. Look at the top CEOs in the US. For a start, women are in a minority. The second striking thing is while top male ceos generally have a family, the same is not true for female ceos. We still have to make the family or career choice: men don't.

And this inequality is men's/society's fault how exactly? It's biology which dictates that women have the children, nothing else.

In cultural life also, women are certainly not treated as equals. You only have to read a few posts on this forum to realise that double standards in sexual matters is rampant among young Irish males, that women are judged, for one, on how thin they they are. Good looking women are thick and bitchy - it's only the ugliers ones that have a personality.

And Darwinism should take care of this, as all the smart, good looking women with personalities will mate with the males who aren't sexist and don't have double standards. Or is this asking too much of women?

Equality is now enshrined in law, but attitudes have still a long way to go. Women in Ireland earn 84% of men's wages.

This is one statistic which still pisses me off. It's a complete nonsense statistic. By and large, men make more than women, yes. But to claim that this is inequality is complete horsecrap. In general, men make more than women because they get promoted higher, due to women's career choices: choosing to work in lower paid fields (e.g. childcare, HR, admin etc.); choosing to have children and put their career on hold for a while; choosing to work part-time or job-share to spend more time with their children etc. Show me a man and a woman doing the same job receiving different salaries and I'll take this statistic seriously. Until then, stop repeating it.

Women in Ireland are still being (illegally) made redundant when they get pregnant. I know male employers reluctant to hire women in their late twenties / early thirties for fear they'll get pregnant (even through it is the State, not them, that pay statutory maternity leave).

I know female employers reluctant to hire women in their late twenties / early thirtiesfor the same reason. It's illegal and immoral but let's be honest, it's good business.

There is a lot of work to be done in figuring out how to mix pregnancy and work, but the women I work with do not want to give up their jobs forever just because they have children.

Well, they'll have to either get jobs which can pay for childcare or earn enough to support a stay at home husband.

Women have been subjugated by men for centuries, mentally and phyically. For centuries we have been told we are too sensitve for important work, or even for study, that our brains couldn't cope with intellectual rigour. Now you're telling me that I'm naturally unable to be good at maths, that men are naturally better at being inventive and cutting edge. Bollocks - its just another way of hanging on to the status quo.

If it's what the research being conducted into the human psyche indicates, why do you feel that it's Bollocks? Are you as opposed to the research indicating that women are better multi-taskers than men are? If not, who's really the sexist here?

Things are changing, but they are certainly not there yet.

And what, other than time do you think can bring us there? Societal change will always take time, the framework has been already put in place so it's now just a matter of waiting for the changes to take effect. Look at the Law Society or Blackhall Place for example, both traditionally male dominated and both now teaching to classes that have a noticable female majority.

Really? Can you name a company in Ireland that does this? I can honestly say I have never heard of one of these programmes, in the UK or Ireland. Neither have I heard any of my friends, who work in a variety of medium and large companies in Ireland and the UK mention these.

I must admit, I've never seen one of these "women in the workplace" course either. I have seen "Personal Development" courses offered to staff by one of the major banks and the course was only attended by women so maybe this is the type of thign Stark is reffering to.

Sleepy

eoin_s wrote:

I think you can be pro-equality even if you are anti-feminist.

Since feminism is about furthering women's interests rathering than seeking equality it's very easy to be so. In fact, I believe any woman that was genuinely interested in equality should be anti-feminist.