Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

fly_agaric wrote: »

I do wonder sometimes what will happen to the gender balance in the student population once the "STEM" issue is sorted out to the liking of feminists (50/50 intake in stuff like maths, computer science and physics).

I think, even with the unconscionably high numbers of males in Engineering courses its around 60 % female students overall in Irish universities (not that you ever see that little stat publicised much!).

Look Fly, you just have to realise that Feminism isn't about women it's about power. *

So equality doesn't mean equal in this context. It's merely a vehicle for gaining power, using the language of equality in a 1984 way.

*BTW I'd recommend spending 10 minutes watching Kate Andrews from the Institute of Economic Affairs forensically take apart UK Labour MP Stella Creasy when talking about the gender pay gap. It's a cold, calculated and brutally effective takedown Creasy's m'uh feels argument.

Under new performance compacts, higher education institutions face the risk of a cut of up to 10pc of annual State funding if they do not meet certain performance objectives, and gender equality has been included as one of those.

[..]

Another key measure in the plan requires colleges to set targets for the recruitment and promotion of women to senior positions and failure to meet such targets would be a factor in the level of State funding they receive.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/pioneering-move-first-womenonly-professorships-in-place-by-september-37522616.html

Maxpfizer wrote: »

I think it would be fine if it was just down to a shortage of people in general. So if there was a need for X number of people in STEM and the maximum number of men who even want to be in STEM had been reached.

Plus their actions are kind of self defeating in a lot of ways. On one hand they want more women in STEM but also on the other hand they also want more women taking Gender Studies etc.

So, for example, Gender Studies courses are in competition with STEM courses for students but at the same time they are campaigning for women to take STEM courses. That almost makes no sense.

Oh, that's not the only contradiction - as I often said here and on other venues, the #1 downfall of modern "feminism" is that it largely paints women as weak, insecure wallflowers of feeble mind and heightened sensitivities, incapable of facing criticism, humor nor the consequences of their own choices, and who need to be "protected" by some superior political "entity"...basically babies in adult bodies.



Personal experience with female friends, coworkers and family members tells me otherwise...luckily for us all.

Maxpfizer wrote: »

We never will hear "we need more women in garages", "we need more women in metal working" or "we need more women on construction sites".


What I think we will hear instead is demand for a discussion on the "value" of the work.

STEM is an easy one because, as you say, it's not physically demanding. So they just say "too many men, get more women in here".

Lets say we are talking about a large supermarket chain. They will have more women on checkouts and more men in the warehouse. That's gonna be a tough one to equalize because the warehouse work could be demanding in a way that causes many women to say "i'd rather be on checkouts".

What's the "value" of the individual work though? That's what they will go after next, in my opinion.

That's a big one which I believe was discussed earlier: The simple fact that there are people who DON'T WANT to work in a warehouse due to the requirements of the job (handling heavy objects, being in a less-than-comfortable environment, moderate risk of accidents and/or injury) should be more than enough to explain the higher pay compared to somebody sitting at a cash register.



Going the way of "value" of the job is simply not possible, yet I think you're on the money here in terms of "what's going on".

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Why should a man in the warehouse be paid more than a woman on the checkouts? They provide the same "value" to the company so pay them the same.

So you won't hear "we need more women in metal working" but you will hear, eventually, "metal working has the same value as <inset majority female occupation here> so they should earn the same".

I think that the whole Feminist movement is kind of anti-capitalist and opposed to meritocracy at it's foundation and the "need more women in STEM" thing is a manifestation of that.

They can "fix" that one with quotas etc but closing the "pay gap" itself would require more control on what people are actually allowed to earn.

Closing the "pay gap" is actually extremely simple - more women can take hard, dirty and dangerous job...or those with long hours, or the ones that involve unsociable settings, lots of travel and zero social life.



There's a girl in the office I work, she's younger than me by a fair bit and I am pretty sure she earns a LOT more than I do (she can afford things I simply can't). Whenever I've arrived at the office earlier than usual, her car's the only one already there except for the security guard's; Last Friday I had some extra stuff to take care of, left at around 8ish pm, and her car was the only one in the car park...I simply couldn't do that, I value my own time, and I am perfectly fine with not being paid as much as she is due to that.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-11-largest-psychological-sex-differences-autistic.html

Largest ever study of psychological sex differences and autistic traits
November 12, 2018, University of Cambridge

The team also calculated the difference (or 'd-score') between each individual's score on the systemizing and empathy tests. A high d-score means a person's systemizing is higher than their empathy, and a low d-score means their empathy is higher than their systemizing.

They found that in the typical population, men, on average, had a shift towards a high d-score, whereas women, on average, had a shift towards a low d-score. Autistic individuals, on average, had a shift towards an even higher d-score than typical males. Strikingly, d-scores accounted for 19 times more of the variance in autistic traits than other variables, including sex.

Finally, men, on average, had higher autistic trait scores than women. Those working in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), on average, had higher systemizing and autistic traits scores than those in non-STEM occupations. And conversely, those working in non-STEM occupations, on average, had had higher empathy scores than those working in STEM.

I thought these results might have been mentioned here, but can't find them on a quick search.

They suggest that there are differences in the way men and women think on average.
And the type of thinking patterns seen more in people in the STEM professions are more common in men.

This suggests that differences in the numbers of men and women in the STEM areas/professions may not be due to discrimination (or alternatively, I suppose, such discrimination could still be part of the reason, but not necessarily all of it).

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

In other news:

Britain’s education system is failing to tackle the “astonishing” underperformance of boys as feminists have made the topic “taboo”, the former head of the university admissions service has warned.

Mary Curnock Cook, who was chief executive of Ucas until last year, said the fact that boys are falling behind in education is a national scandal – yet it is such an “unfashionable” topic to discuss that it has become “normalised”.

Girls outperform boys in all aspects of education, from primary school to GCSEs and A-level results. Last year, 57 per cent of women went to university compared to 43 per cent of men, a gap that has widened significantly over the last decade.

Normally, I get cynical about this sort of thing but the former chief executive of UCAS is probably one of the most qualified people in the world to speak on this. I knew there was a gap but I didn't realise that this were so bad that she felt compelled to speak out.

When attempts are made to address men’s issues, they are ridiculed and are met with the “wrath” of feminist and gender equality groups, she said.


Last month the only university in the UK with a men’s officer scrapped the role after the candidate withdrew due to “harassment”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/24/university-uk-mens-officer-scraps-role-candidate-withdraws-alleged/



James Knight was the only candidate to his name forward to be men's officer at the University of the West of England, and said he wanted to highlight male mental health issues.


However, the National Union of Students officers began a campaign against the role, and he pulled out after claiming he harassed. The university said the post was suspended pending review.

For those who don't know, colleges often have officers for women.

Student Rebecca Sheeres added: “Can someone explain to me why a men’s officer is necessary please?

"Especially when UWE students actually voted against such position. Men are not a minority at university and surely appointing a wellbeing officer would cover men’s mental health.”

Actually, it looks like students were in favour of it by a slim majority, but it didn't read some higher threshold:
https://www.thestudentsunion.co.uk/representation/student-ideas/106/

Has anyone else noticed the change in news presenters and panel shows where men seem to be in a minority now. News programs, current affairs TV shows and radio shows seem to be dominated by women. I notice the same on BBC.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Very true. Maynooth university have a masters in gender studies, most of the grads are unemployed, doing voluntary or unskilled work. On paper they are more educated , but in Reality a lad doing an apprenticeship as an electrician will earn more over his lifetime and contribute more to society, yet its an education crisis now, and a gender pay inequality crisis against him in 10 years.

It's like a vicious circle, they basically create a view that there are big societal jobs that need to be solved and get then selves work in the gender study area. However nature of the beast is that unless we move to some sort of totalitarian gender study type state only a few at the top will ever get a job.

The rest will do low paid work and complain about the man putting them down .

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nah, there's journalists who know more than a lot of the ex-players. Unfortunately the ladies they generally choose seem to fall into the eye candy or the ex-player-so-must-know-loads categories.

Journalists my arse.

I see rte news doing a feature on waking the feminist on today's news. No mention of international men's day. Looks like trolling.