There’s nothing wrong about being pretty, or sexy, or shopping, or being interested in traditionally girly things—but there is a big problem when that’s the only option you’re given. I know I’d be stressed if I were constantly told I’m less of a man if I’m not playing football or working in a manly occupation that involved large wrenches and heavy industrial tools, so I can sympathize with the limited choices given women: oh, you aren’t wearing a bikini on your lithe body with the large breasts? Then you’re an ugly dyke. You aren’t planning a career as a homemaker and mother? You just want to be a man.
So let’s socialize the little girls early, and start them on video games with good role models: slender women obsessed with clothes and boyfriends.
Read the description. It’s appallingly shallow. It makes me want to run out and buy John Madden’s football video game, so I can learn what it takes to be a True Man.
That’s one side of the problem: pressure to conform to a ridiculously narrow set of values. Here’s the other: the absence of support and recognition when you try to pursue other better, greater interests.
There’s just something wrong with our society. Women, get out there and fix it, OK?
(Also on Sb)
754 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
Ing
13 October 2011 at 4:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Laziest post title ever, PZ. I mean, isn’t that just the default place holder title for all posts?
24fps
13 October 2011 at 4:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Working on it…
Lolewhin
13 October 2011 at 4:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s not the job of women to get out there and fix it, PZ. It’s not a women’s issue, it’s an issue for all of us. Our society as a whole is lessened, we are all worse off. As beneficiaries of the power imbalance, men don’t have an obvious incentive to get out there and fix it. Nevertheless, it is part of our responsibility.
Mary
13 October 2011 at 5:00 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m a gamer. I also have a vagina. I like to play zombie-killing games, post apocalyptic survival games but also enjoy dress up games. But I stay away from anything that tries to tell me what to do and how to act/look.
Glodson
13 October 2011 at 5:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Shit. That bothered me more than I thought it would. I know how hard it is going to be raising my little girl in this deluge of shit. That just brought it home a little more.
I hope my wife and I can instill in our daughter the self confidence to not fall for that bullshit. I hope she learns, and finds the strength, to forge her own way in life. I hope she sticks to things that truly interest her, not what she feels she should be interested in.
And was I the only one that had to hold back from attempting to punch the MRA in the video through my computer?
philippschaub
13 October 2011 at 5:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“It’s a very very sad commentary on the values
of our culture, when shooting a ball into a basket
is more laudable, more praiseworthy, more
admirable and more rewarded than teasing out some
fundamental truths about the natural world or
finding a cure for AIDS or Cancer.”
Carolyn Proco
Ing
13 October 2011 at 5:06 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
The interface makes me think of the datesim/H-games of Japan.
I feel ill.
ryanmannik
13 October 2011 at 5:06 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“It’s not the job of women to get out there and fix it, PZ. ”
Learn to spot jokes ,please.
Nice Ogress
13 October 2011 at 5:07 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m trying.
I work for an educational video games company, making games for the juvenile market. This is something we fight about with every single client. “Well, we want girls to play it, so.. can you dumb down the science a bit? Maybe make it all pink-palette? Oh, and this vocab list is too hard…” “NGRAAAAH NiOg SMASH.”
Lolewhin
13 October 2011 at 5:10 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“Learn to spot jokes ,please.”
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law
The Chimp's Raging Id
13 October 2011 at 5:15 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I had to similarly restrain myself.
excrusader
13 October 2011 at 5:17 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As a female who was a tomboy as a kid an a very successful athlete in college, I’ve only recently come to realize that I am a little misogynistic myself. The cause? Growing up in a world that didn’t value a female who had my “masculine” interests and goals. It’s no wonder that “girly girl” behavior (to which I was expected to conform) strikes me as vacuous and annoying now. Perhaps, if my innate tendencies to be athletic and smart were truly validated as a girl, I might not have such a negative reaction to that behavior now.
Clare
13 October 2011 at 5:17 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Two thoughts:
1. At first glance the cartoon woman looks like she’s wearing underpants on her head. Was planning on making some amusing comment about that until …
2. My jaw just literally fell when I heard the response to what’s wrong about a female president, “aside from the PMS and moodswings?” What. The. Fuck?!
Oh, tell me about it. I’m a geek, an occasional gamer, a major sci-fi fan. I rarely wear make-up, much prefer trousers over skirts, laugh at woo, etc. I know I’m seen as the slightly odd one and, I admit, I play up to that as I’d rather be odd than conform.
julian
13 October 2011 at 5:22 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yeah, at first I thought it was one of the Holio U games. Freaky.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with dressing up in games. Pimping out an avatar is a big part of most rpgs and something even the manliest of men engage in when creating their avatar for X-Box Live. It can be (for some unknown reason to me) fun trying out different hats on the large headed cartoon you.
This game…I just can’t get behind. May have something to do with the quest objectives. Somehow
- Start the Cookiegirl course.
- Go to the hair stylist, pink just came into fashion…
- Buy at least two more items you like from shops in the Mall
just seem to be the opposite of empowering women.
And GAH! your boyfriend ‘gives’ x dollars per day?!
Herb
13 October 2011 at 5:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I had to laugh at “John Madden’s football video game”. PZ is obviously not a gamer…
justinnelson
13 October 2011 at 5:29 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To be fair, men are also constrained by sexist images in society. We are told that we are less men for not playing sports, or for working in certain occupations. I just had my mother tell me that I had to cut my hair for her birthday party next week because she wanted a family photo in which her sons “look like men.”
Granted, sexism hurts women far more than it hurts men- but it hurts everybody. So we should all have an interest in working to change it.
Marcus Ranum
13 October 2011 at 5:32 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Why is she wearing panties on her head? That’s what I want to know.
pHred
13 October 2011 at 5:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Is it just me or are the toy aisles and children’s clothing much worse now then they were twenty or thirty years ago ? I hate the pink aisle and have you tried to buy pants for a little girl that wants pockets? It is almost impossible! Not to mention that everything is cut to fit way too tightly and to emphasize curves that are not even there on a toddler body. #$%&#*$&@$%@#$& !!!
What the hell has gone wrong over the past few decades ? I cope with my daughter playing princess because she also does other things, but I seriously worry about what is going to happen in school. She is smart and cute – so which one is she going to be valued for ?
Etcetera
13 October 2011 at 5:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It works the other way too. Being told that you’re “too pretty” to be a lesbian is the most offensive thing I get on a regular basis. The people who tell me this (men and women) don’t seem to understand that what they think is a compliment just informed me that something unchangeable about me is only for “ugly people” who are worth less.
Fox
13 October 2011 at 5:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Games this vacuous have little appeal for women in the age group represented – they’re all about teaching/reinforcing gender roles to children. This is just the digitization of trying on mommy’s makeup/dressing Barbie up to go on a date. That kind of thing has been commercialized and turned into a “game” for years (see: Pretty Pretty Princess, any of those creepy disembodied almost-lifesize doll heads you’re supposed to make up and style…), but it kind of takes something like this, that makes the purpose of the whole enterprise so explicit, to shock us. Little girl smashing Barbie and Ken’s heads together to make them “kiss” at the end of their “date”? Normal. Little girl clicking a button to make a digital avatar “flirt”? Shocking!
So, I guess my point is, this is nothing new. The only novelty is, perhaps, the creators/marketers’ blithe obliviousness to how backwards and offensive this setup sounds when you’re up-front about it.
(Although in saying that, even this jaded girl cringed at the part about how much money your boyfriend gives you a week..)
Brother Yam
13 October 2011 at 5:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Did anyone recognize the douchecanoe MRA that BOR was talking to? I’ve seen the comments here and chalk that up to the Internet Factor, but to see one in the wild is quite shocking. I know big brave man talk like that on Internet, but to see a real life asshat was really nauseating.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 5:41 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PZ, I contend that males are put under similar pressures, especially during formative years. Like cooking? Quit being a pussy and go outside and play football. Interested in clothing? All the clothing you need is a pair of dirty steel toed boots and some jeans. Go fight, go conquer, provide everything for everyone.
The solution here is bigger than just focusing on the plight of one gender. Western society needs a complete abolishment of gender roles, gender identity and expectations associated with those roles and identities.
People can scream until they’re blue in the face about sexism against women or roles being carved for women, but they won’t go away until roles for men are also gotten rid of, otherwise the fallback role society tries to put women into will be the stuff men aren’t expected to do in their roles.
WishYouWereHere
13 October 2011 at 5:43 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Hmmm, maybe I’m living in a different world …
My sixteen year old son and his female buddies pretty much spend their free time as, 4 Mary said, playing “zombie-killing games, post apocalyptic survival games”, paintball, rugby, etc.
Sheez, I wouldn’t dare suggest to any of these girls that they should go do something feminine ’cause I really do like my balls and would like to keep them intact. Hell, I wouldn’t even trust my son’s zombie-killing-psyched buddies with not helping the girls remove said balls for making that type of misogynistic comment, and I’d deserve it.
Thus, while my kid and his friends are really screwed up, they’ve got this one right. Just commenting.
Cheers
Gord O'Mitey
13 October 2011 at 5:47 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
#18
It’s called the Magic of the Market. I can’t understand how so many people fall for it, but, social contagion is sub-conscious.
unbound
13 October 2011 at 5:48 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Definitely a venture for all of us to push against. I remember my daughter getting pushed into the niche of “pushy” or “bossy” just because she is strong willed. Of course, a boy would be exhibiting “leadership” when they exhibit the same traits…which is how the discussion went with that teacher that year (a woman who apparently didn’t get that she was continuing the legacy gender roles). We didn’t hear those terms describing our daughter again from that teacher, and, fortunately, she didn’t press the issue with our daughter directly.
If we want things like this to change, then we need to push back against all the little things as well as the big things. Need to push back against the jokes that paint women with this brush. Need to push back against the subtle comments as much as the outright sexist comments. Be the person that we want others to be.
Emily
13 October 2011 at 5:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Raising a daughter is especially challenging. I regularly encourage my daughter to allow her gender to be fluid and not constrained by the expectations of this society. It’s a regular focus to find clothing, toys, and the books that don’t coerce her into being little ms barbie.
Sastra
13 October 2011 at 5:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
excrusader #12 wrote:
Being young sucks all around, I think. I was a “girly girl” and instead felt as if all the pressure was towards being brave, fearless, and good at sports. Of course, I wasn’t particularly good at being a girly-girl either (not pretty or flirty.) A fair number of children and teens may be walking around under the dark impression that others don’t approve of them whatever the case may be.
Years ago I read about a study that asked adolescent girls if they considered themselves a “tomboy.” The proportion who said “yes” was astonishingly high — something like 80-90%. If that result is representative, it does seem to suggest that the stigma against ‘masculine’ interests and goals might not be that strong.
Shibujiro
13 October 2011 at 6:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I disagree. Men are just as socially constrained by gender roles as women, probably moreso. Women have a hard time when they want to live a life traditionally reserved for men. True, but it’s much easier than in the past, i.e., it’s actually possible. Men, on the other hand, have a much harder time if they want to life a life traditionally reserved for women. Men feel obligated to work long hours, to sacrifice time to enjoy life with family and friends, and as a result suffer more disease and earlier death than women.
Agree 100%.
Ophelia Benson
13 October 2011 at 6:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Argh. There is so much of this kind of crap around…Women are all desperate/real “housewives” and girls are all future desperate/real “housewives.” ARGH I tell you!
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 6:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Although this is true as well, keep in mind that the main way to put down a guy who does not conform is to compare him to a girl. So even when boys are teased for not being manly enough, the language implies femininity being inferior to masculinity. So the problem is still mostly sexism towards women. When femininity no longer is considered inferior, then where is the insult?
Epinephrine
13 October 2011 at 6:08 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m raising 3 daughters, and of course I am sensitive to the pressures on them to be girly. When our son (second child) was born, his uncle said “now I have someone to take paint balling,” to which I responded, “and why couldn’t you take [eldest]?”
Of course, as you said, there is nothing wrong with being interested in typical girly things. My eldest daughter collects skulls and loves biology, and has no interest in fashion at all (though she does like necklaces). My middle daughter likes princesses and dresses. Neither is “better.”
kakaydin
13 October 2011 at 6:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Anyone else seen the new TV commercial (for Tide detergent, I think) in which a mother is lamenting her (5ish) daughter’s predilection for cargo pants and playing with building blocks? While the little girl finishes building her structure, the ad ends with the mother saying, patronizingly, “Another car garage honey? looks great!”
The ad really bothered me that they were portraying a real problem (gender type-casting in young children) as though it were some silly suburban idiosyncracy.
Here’s the ad:
“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9LTRbWsGOI”
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 6:14 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Species8472 I don’t think that people are necessarily implying masculinity is superior in that situation. I remember when I was in high school, there was an overweight cheer-leader with incredibly wide shoulders who went hunting during rifle season. The other cheerleaders called her a dyke and started “taking bets” on whether or not she had a penis for exhibiting masculine characteristics.
I don’t think being called out on gender roles is a product of sexism towards on gender or another, or perceived superiority, so much as a societal expectation to conform to what is understood traditionally to be your dictated role in society.
That being said, life would be 100% better for everyone if there were no such roles or traditions.
Shibujiro
13 October 2011 at 6:15 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Shibujiro
13 October 2011 at 6:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sorry blockquote fail.
No way. When a tomboy, or an asprining politician, businesswoman, etc. is teased/mocked for being too masculine, does this somehow imply that men are inferior to women, even though it’s usually the men doing the teasing and mocking? I don’t think so. It’s bucking social norms that affects us all.
(I don’t disagree that woman are considered inferior by a great number of people. I just disagree with your theory here.)
Sengkelat
13 October 2011 at 6:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Women do not “comprise” 17% of Congress. Did the film maker misuse the word because they didn’t want to say “make up?” Stop the abuse of American English!
Also, pervasive sexism is bad.
Sour Tomato Sand
13 October 2011 at 6:22 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I can sort of see that. I am male and have been cooking since I was 8 years old. I suck at football, when I am occasionally forced to play it, and I don’t like watching it (but my wife loves it). I dress well and I like buying clothes.
By and large most other men I meet don’t like me. We have nothing in common. Five years in the Army, even, and I didn’t make a single male friend. But I assure you I have many female friends who all respect me.
It seems like men enforce this shit on other men, just as women enforce this shit on other women. Personally, I just don’t associate with men who have a problem with people like me. I’m not saying that women don’t influence men and vice-versa, but yeah. Everyone is to blame here.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You’re constrained in your gender roles. I’m constrained in my ability to earn money, to get promotions, to go out alone, to run for office.
Which one do you think hurts more?
nooneinparticular
13 October 2011 at 6:24 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sad to see this kind of crap still out there, but I have to agree with wishyouwerehere @23. The kid’s are alright, at least in some places. Here’s a tale to illustrate
I took my youngest son to go watch some kids jump their bikes at a city owned bike park with a mad series of dirt piles, you know, so the whippersnappers can fracture their bones as much as they like. There was one kid there who was clearly more enthusiastic than skilled. Probably 9 or 10 years old, this kid biffed it a bunch of times trying to catch as much air as possible. Covered in dust and dirt and scrapped up knees and all his buds standing by cheering him on. Every time he crashed he jumped up and shouted excitedly about how much air he got. His pals, some of whom were much better skilled, were super jacked at his efforts even though mostly he crashed. It was nice to see a group of kids so supportive and accepting of each other.
So anyway this beat up, scrapped up, bloody kneed kid rides over to my boy who was watching them with rapt attention. He skidded to stop in front of my son. He just wanted to talk and show my boy his bike. My boy was SO happy that the big guys would pay attention to him.
When my son asked the kid his name he said “Rachel”.
Holy crap. After watching all her daredevilry and fearlessness the old man in me just assumed the kid was a boy. What a dickhead, eh? THIS is what growing up in the patriarchy does to one.
Anyway, my son wasn’t in the least surprised that the kid was a girl. Rachel’s friends came skidding up and made her smile so my son could see the hardware the dentist had to put in her mouth to fix the teeth she’d knocked loose the week before riding the same dirt park.
What a cool grrl, eh? I wonder what a fine woman she’ll make. Reminds me of the song
“This little squirrel I used to be
Slammed her bike down the stairs.
They put silver where her teeth had been;
Silver baby, she grins and grins”
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 6:26 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“You have a New Boyfriend!”
[OK] [SHARE]
share?
well, at least it includes a nod to modern relationships….
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 6:27 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@shojiburo
Why do you disagree with the reasoning? After all, don’t you see what the language is biased towards? If a male is outside of gender role, they are considered “feminine”, as if being a female is worse than being a male. The reason there is these idiotic narrow gender roles for males is because of sexism against females.
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 6:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Oops, wrong nym. I meant @shibujiru. Sorry about that.
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 6:29 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Wow, I fail. I misspelled it again.
excrusader
13 October 2011 at 6:34 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sastra #27 wrote:
I don’t know if you are younger than I am but things have changed quite a bit in the last 20 years as far as women and athleticism. I’m in my mid-forties and have seen things change for the better during my lifetime, though there is still a long way to go. Muscles on girls used to be strange and invite all sorts of Amazonian, steroid and sexual orientation jokes. I refused to wear a tank top as a teenager because I had well developed arm muscles from swimming and didn’t want to hear the jokes. I still swim competitively and I now wear tank tops all the time and get all kinds of positive comments on my arms. Yes, things have gotten better. Title IX is largely responsible for that, IMO.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 6:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Sally Strange – Gender roles for both genders need to be abolished, because expectations placed on women and men, hurt everyone, not just those the expectations or roles are placed on. Arguing who is hurt more is a moot point, akin to arguing is racism is worse for Native Americans or African Americans.
Here is an example of how gender roles placed on men can negatively effect women. Imagine you and I get married. You go on become a successful software developer, you make $70k/yr. I become a construction worker, and I pull $30k/yr. I will be actively mocked by everyone in the world (well, the unenlightened anyway) for making less money than my wife. It creates pressure for me to try to get you to stop working, or to earn less, maybe by trying to persuade you to stay home with kids or something similar.
You’re now in a situation, where you can keep your job, knowing it will cause lots of mockery and stress towards the person you married, or you can concede to my requests and commit career suicide.
Trying to eliminate sexism, while only advocating for women is like trying to eliminate racism, but only advocating for African Americans.
Bronze Dog
13 October 2011 at 6:41 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Nice Ogress:
It really pains me to hear that you have to deal with people like that. I remember seeing some show about the history of model trains that mentioned one attempt to market to girls that consisted of painting the trains pink. I also remember a stink that was raised in the blogosphere about some girl-targeting telescopes and microscopes that were painted pink and had lower magnification than the “vanilla” models.
—
On the topic of non-educational games, I got annoyed with Metroid: Other M (Spoilers below!)
In the course of the game, there’s a flashback to the time Samus was in the military. Her CO (and father figure), Adam Malkovich has to order part of the spaceship jettisoned, otherwise it’ll destroy the whole ship in a few minutes. Unfortunately, Adam’s son is in the part to be jettisoned. Samus objects, desperately pleading for permission to rescue him, but Adam jettisons the part before it explodes. By itself, this scene’s okay with me. For a young, inexperienced, and idealistic person, it’s understandable to react that way to such a hard decision. This sort of thing is supposed to be a set up for showing character growth, by putting that character in a situation where they have to make a similar decision.
In the game’s present, Samus is working with Adam again after leaving the military. At the end of the game, Adam has a plan that involves him fighting Metroids in one part of the ship, preventing any from escaping before that part of the ship can be jettisoned and destroyed. Samus has to remain on the ship and fight Ridley.
If I were writing the scenario, Samus and Adam would have an argument, with Adam giving convincing reasons why his plan is the only workable scenario. Samus would try to argue for something that gets them both out alive without letting Metroids overrun the galaxy, but she’d see reason and reluctantly agree that Adam has to sacrifice himself. Samus would be the one to seal Adam off, showing that she’s grown as a person and can make tough decisions.
The way the creators wrote out the scenario was about the worst way possible: Instead of arguing it out, Adam surprises Samus, stuns her, and describes his plan while she can barely move and seals himself off into the Metroid area, leaving Samus to give a tearful goodbye through a window. That’s bad enough since it smacks down the chance to show that Samus has grown as a character. When you consider that Samus is a woman, it adds subtext of an authoritative male “taking charge and slapping some sense into the hysterical woman.”
Another terrible scene was where she had a freakout when Ridley showed up, even though she killed him at least three or four times at that point in the game timeline.
Samus is supposed to a badass who fights space pirates and doesn’t afraid of anything.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:41 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple, you’re the guy who thinks that economic enfranchisement for minorities is a zero sum game.
In other words, when women gain, men lose.
You’re wrong about that.
So why should I listen to you?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 6:43 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Trying to eliminate sexism, while only advocating for women is like trying to eliminate racism, but only advocating for African Americans.
i get your point, but that analogy needs work.
think about it:
if “African American” = “Women”
then “men” = “?”
caucasian really doesn’t work there.
Denis Loubet
13 October 2011 at 6:45 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
i’m hearing a lot of responses that say yes the pressure is there to conform to the societal stereotype, but I’m not seeing any that say I conform to the societal stereotype because I have no choice. If you listen to the replies here, one gets the impression that those who wish to buck the stereotype can just buck the stereotype as they choose.
Granted the pressure often amounts to bullying, and in some cultures the stereotypes are enforced through violence, but if an the folks replying here can avoid adhering to the stereotype at will, does that mean the people who abopt the stereotype are trapped against their will?
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 6:45 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@zerple
You are missing the point! What’s at the root of all of these narrow gender roles, including for males? It is the patriarchy. That is what we have to attack if we want to eliminate these narrow gender roles. We are not saying that gender roles should be abolished ONLY because it is worse on women. No one said that. But don’t you think the fact that these things are worse for women relevant? Because that is what is at the core of it all.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 6:48 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Sally Strange – Like it or not, money is a finite resource. Someone’s gain in money, is someone else’s loss in money. I wasn’t commenting on the morality of that, so much as pointing out that it inevitably happens, then there was a troll explosion from people arguing against a point I wasn’t making.
Aside from that, your comment is a non-sequitur. Have no point? Just bring up something unrelated. Woohoo.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:49 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
The problem is gendered, and the problem is that the system favors one gender over the other, and enforces it by penalizing people of both genders for getting out of like.
Yes, PHMT (patriarchy hurts men too) but the damage is not symmetrical.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 6:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Why the fuck is it always the woman’s problem?
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s related because it relates to the probability that you know what you’re talking about and/or are arguing in good faith.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Excuse me, “getting out of line,” not “getting out of like.”
Beatrice, anormalement indécente
13 October 2011 at 6:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Denis Loubet
First you have to realize those stereotypes exist. Then, acknowledging that you have unknowingly conformed to stupid or dangerous stereotypes may not be easy. Ask people who have said that they have chosen to act as they wish, despite the stereotyping, if they had it easy. I’m sure some did, but I bet there is going to be a large number of people who didn’t. It depends on the type of person you are, on how much support you have from your family or friends. Anyway, it’s definitely not as easy as it sounds to you.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 6:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ing Well, if you read the entire post, you’ll see I was intentionally trying to cause a problem for a woman, with gender roles placed on me. So in that case, it was by design =P
Ing
13 October 2011 at 6:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
No seriously, why is the ridicule and mockery of someone because their wife is more successful the woman’s problem? You know what’s a good solution? Getting friends who are decent human beings and not giant walking talking penises.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Indeed. Misogyny is defined by actions and words. A man who values his pride, and not being mocked by other men, over his wife’s ability to have a fulfilling and lucrative occupation is acting as a misogynist would. A man who is trying to fight patriarchy would take the opportunity to tell the men who are mocking him that they are being sexist assholes and let it go.
If that were me, I’d get a divorce. But then I’d probably never marry such a person anyway.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 6:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
pHred:
It’s not just you, we were discussing this in another thread. It has gotten worse. A bad indicator all around.
Zerple, you’re playing your “zero sum game” crap again, knock it off. Entrenched sexism hurts everyone, to different degrees.
I was a tomboy growing up, I found climbing trees to be much more interesting than “girl” pursuits. I was happiest up a tree with a book.
I was athletic in HS, varsity swim and dive team. I was also on the archery team and fencing team. Fencing was good. Being handy with sharp, pointy items was good.
Richard Austin
13 October 2011 at 6:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple:
The discrimination hurts women more because, most often, the economic independence/advantageous positions are classified as “male territory” or “male roles” and women excluded; that’s a huge disparity. You and I are forbidden from cooking; she’s forbidden from supporting herself.
Yes, there are downsides that affect both genders, but when it comes to the factor of “independence” – which is huge – women are affected more. Men generally made the rules, so men generally benefit more from them (even if both sides lose overall).
Ing
13 October 2011 at 6:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Zerple Nerple
You failed and displayed what looks like sexist asshattery by ruling out actual solutions to the problem.
I suspect this is closer to the truth.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 6:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Your design sucks. It lacks imagination and betrays your ingrained misogynist assumptions. Smiley emoticons notwithstanding.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 6:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ing – I agree, I’m just saying, problems can be caused for individuals by gender roles placed on the opposite gender.
The solution is to get rid of all of these roles for everyone.
nooneinparticular
13 October 2011 at 6:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
drat. I was going to comment on Ing’s post (@53) but then Sally Strange (@59) yanked the words right out of my..er…keyboard.
What she said.
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 6:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Bronze Dog
Gaahhhh!!!! Other M messed one of the greatest videogame franchise of all freaking time!!! I will never get over that. That relationship with Samus and Malkovich makes Samus look like a codependet. It loods abusive and unhealthy. It was such sexist garbage. I don’t know what the creators were thinking.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 6:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing:
QFT.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 6:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Reminds me of how on Comics Crumugeon, they mock the Spiderman comic for CONSTANTLY having the “my wife makes more than me” angst with Peter Parker.
This is someone who is married to an actress…and has the powers of a demigod… and the income disparity apparently constantly bugs him. The commentary constantly harps on how this makes Parker look absolutely PATHETIC. Not the disparity of income but actually caring about it.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 6:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You do realize that the man is being “punished” by his peers for NOT BEING DOMINANT TO HIS WOMAN. I’m sorry if I fail to see how this is actually helpful to your point.
Gender roles: Women who don’t act like women are punished. Men who ACT LIKE WOMEN are punished because being a woman is horrible.
You know convincing people that it’s not horrible to be ‘a woman’ might fix those issues.
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 7:00 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@zerple
The fact that you consider being mocked by stupid friends of the fact that the wife has a job that much important is indicative of your attitude. You can’t even consider the viewpoint of the woman.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Seriously, the guy could address the issue with his behavior…he could choose to take a lower paying job that has a less hostile environment. He is still at a loss but he might deem it a superior solution. Or he might look for a higher paying job to avoid the issue. Or he could work there, note that co-workers aren’t necessarily your BFF and piss in the coffee pot every morning.
happiestsadist
13 October 2011 at 7:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
And as usual, we’ve got a dumbass or two who insists that the real problem with patriarchy is that occasionally, there are some constraints on the hobbies men can enjoy without being insulted by being called women (which is of course okay). Yes, PHMT, but compared to earning less, being treated as an incubator, being expected to be decorative at all times? Sorry d00dz, getting called a woman (which of course is an insult) is fucking nothing.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yes, but you are deliberately erasing the part where the husband CAUSES the problem by accepting and reinforcing, and attempting to enforce the gender roles on his wife. The gender roles aren’t just sitting there. They require complicity and participation. You seem to be blind to the complicity and participation of the man in your scenario. Why is that?
NightShadeQueen
13 October 2011 at 7:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
My worst-case scenario – not having a job, losing my career, and having to depend on you, which might or might not work out well. If anything happens to you (or if I later choose to leave the relationship), this will really suck for me.
Your worst-case scenario – your friends mock you.
…I fail to see how this is worse for you.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:04 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple, you’re playing your “zero sum game” crap again, knock it off. Entrenched sexism hurts everyone, to different degrees.
I read Zerp totally differently.
to me this was an article about gender typing, not sexism specifically.
I took Zerp to be addressing the gender typing issue, and YES that is bad for both sexes, and needs to be fixed for BOTH sexes.
I see sexism as a related issue, but NOT the same one.
If I’m wrong, Zerp, just say so, but if you point was really focusing on gender typing, you might want to make it a bit clearer.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
FIFY
ibyea
13 October 2011 at 7:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Bronze Dog
Read this article on Other M: http://moonbase.rydia.net/mental/blog/gaming/metroid-other-m-the-elephant/article.html
It is a good analysis on what went wrong on the characters of the game.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Strange, Ing & others: Of course the man in my story was complicit in the role being pushed on him. That’s part of the point of the story. People frequently adopt and enforce these things on themselves. If there were no roles, he would not be pressuring them to help him adhere to them.
The problem is not male or female, the problem is obnoxious, unrealistic rigid gender roles which are pervasive throughout society.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Icthyic, Zerple avidly defended the zero-sum premise here and in another thread. That’s true, independent of whether he’s trying to make a point about typing.
I agree, gender stereotypes and rigid roles are very damaging to both men and women. In men you see concrete results as they are less likely to go to the doctor, because that would mean admitting weakness and that’s not “manly.”
But the damage is, as I said, not symmetrical. I am not sure if Zerple is trying to claim that the damage is symmetrical. I do think that his hypothetical scenario is more revealing of his own sexist mindset than anything else.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:11 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Oh god.. Fuck the other M so hard.
If I can pimp a video game. Fallout: New Vegas has so far impressed me, the character set is a good mix and gender/sexuality seems to be open and decently done.
I do have to note that from the two factions (New California Republic and Caesar’s Legion) the “good” one seems to be gender non-discriminant (male and female soldiers are mixed and both on the front line and you see a good number of female leaders) while the “bad” one has only men in it’s army.
*I have heard that there is a story line involving rape but I haven’t found it so I can’t comment on it yet.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space
13 October 2011 at 7:12 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple, shorter: “But what about the menz?!”
Dude, you need to learn some econ. Money for all practical purposes is NOT a finite resource–that’s one of the reasons why the gold standard doesn’t work. Productivity can increase–that increases the money supply. Both inflation and deflation affect the money supply and purchasing power.
Seems to me that getting rid of teh stereotype that women must be dependent upon a man means your construction worker ceases to have a problem.
Louis
13 October 2011 at 7:12 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I was mocked for earning less than my wife once.
It was worse than being exploited, raped, discriminated against, beaten, marginalised, disenfranchised, undervalued, patronised, controlled, shamed, and coerced into conforming to a narrow stereotype.
I had to go and have a lie down.
Won’t someone worry about me? About my needs? All you uppity women here and no one wants to apply a cool flannel to my forehead and make me a sammich. Oh the humanity! It’s all your fault you know.
Louis
P.S. Yup that looks about right. How’d I do?
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ichthyic – I think I love you. You pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:14 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichthyic:
Zerple started up with the zero-sum game in a different thread and hasn’t let go of that notion.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:14 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
No, the problem within the relationship is demonstrably related to the man’s behavior. The woman has already done her part to challenge those gender roles by getting an education and a high-paying job. The man is not doing his part to challenge those rigid gender roles.
The only way we’re going to solve the problem of unrealistic, rigid gender roles, is if more and more men like the guy in your scenario turn to their mates and buddies and say, “Knock it off with your sexist assholery. I’m proud of my wife and I really don’t care that she makes more than me. I don’t see why you do, unless you think men should always dominate women. Are you a bunch of sexists?”
The problem is that you, and people who think like you, are blinded to the obvious solution by your privilege and biases.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Now Sally Strange has moved to ad hominem attacks “I do think that his hypothetical scenario is more revealing of his own sexist mindset than anything else”. The last refuge of someone with no legitimate point to make.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Louis:
You better get your own damn beer, too. I’m tired, I’ve been workin’ all day.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:18 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Strange: That’s the point of my story, that you can e effected by the expectation put on, and the behaviors of, SOMEONE ELSE.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sorry, typo.
@Strange: That’s the point of my story, that you can be effected by the expectation put on, and the behaviors of, SOMEONE ELSE.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
That assessment is well-supported and I’ve already explained why I think it is the case. Therefore, while you may find it insulting, it is not an ad hominem attack.
Do you dispute that you have unconscious sexist biases that may have been revealed by the assumptions you made in your hypothetical scenario? If so, please explain.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ichthyic
The problem is that he immediately phrase this problem as one where the WOMAN has to make the friend or idol decision. The Third Option is blinding obvious and amounts to a Jackass induced plot hole.
excrusader
13 October 2011 at 7:20 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ Louis (#82):
I’d upvote if I could!
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:20 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yeah, except that the “you” in your story was, by your assumption, woman. She, not her husband, is the one who has to deal with the expectations. The expectations were imposed on him, he accepted them and went and imposed them on his wife, because that’s the way things are “supposed” to be.
That’s sexism in a nutshell.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple:
That is not an ad hominem, you fuckwit. Yes, you’ve outed yourself as a whiny, self-pitying fuckwit.
Ad Hominem, if you can manage to click a link and understand your own idiocy.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I might also note that isn’t 70,000 a year close to what they found the cap of monetary induced happiness to be? ie the point at which it doesn’t matter if you have 70,000 or 70,000,000 happiness is more or less equal?
Fuck the guy could possibly quit his job and be a househusband if the problem was that bad. Yeah he’d be mocked for being a house husband but one party gets 50% more time to fish and do manly things like knife fight grizzly bears and the other party is working at EatshitanddieINC. The last laugh and all.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:24 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple
Your stories are trivities. When they’re accurate they bring nothing new to the table and when they would be profound they are hilariously stupid
kd
13 October 2011 at 7:25 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Women, get out there and fix it, OK?
Yeah, we could use a little help over here!
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:26 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Strange:
“Do you dispute that you have unconscious sexist biases that may have been revealed by the assumptions you made in your hypothetical scenario? If so, please explain.”
Yes, I constructed the scenario to be sexist to illustrate a point. There is nothing unconscious about it. I could, however argue that your response had an unconscious sexist bias against men, as your response to the hypothetical husband’s emotional pain was something to the effect of “Quit being a wuss and deal with it”. Sound like someone likes her men to conform to the warrior archetype doesn’t it?
All-in-all, the story is just there to point out that all gender roles are a problem for everyone.
ChrisH
13 October 2011 at 7:27 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I was working on the computer this morning listening to the local radio station and talk about screwed up. I kid you not a commercial from a local church stating that they were starting Machismo classes. Come and learn how to be a real “man”,what it means to be a real man and something about taking care of your family and “the little lady” I almost did a spit take on the computer screen.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
“An ad hominem (Latin: “to the man”, “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.”
“I do think that his hypothetical scenario is more revealing of his own sexist mindset than anything else”
Learn to read before you try to call people out.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:30 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
ChrisH:
Standard christian the man is the head of the family, the woman must submit, yada, yada, yada. Religion is a heavy hitter when it comes to upholding and enforcing patriarchal values.
pHred
13 October 2011 at 7:32 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Could we possibly just agree that the standard roles presented as socially acceptable in the United States are at best ridiculous and at worst extraordinarily destructive ? It is pretty silly to argue about who has it worst (“gay” appearing male regardless of actual sexual preference verses ugly smart woman ? What a load of cows bullocks! – that whole scenario means actually buying into these awful stereotypes) when the energy would be better spent trying to change things. (Alright, I know – rose colored glasses anyone ?)
This applies not just to gender roles (why does cooking keep coming up as a limiting role – well I guess women cook and men are “chefs” – look it up – whatever) but to what our society values as a whole. Look at what we pay teachers and how they are generally valued verses how much we pay actors whose political opinions we keep being subjected to for some strange reason. Yes I am well aware that there are poorly paid actors too – but I think you get the gist of my argument.
With respect to raising children, both of mine are being subjected (more and more as they get older) to some of the awful consequences of not conforming to the norm. I hate it! My son likes to read and cook, my daughter also likes to cook and to play in the mud in her princess dress – all of which is normal – but is not respected as such by the larger media norm. This is one of the reasons that the media images that my children are exposed to are as controlled as I can make them. The problem is that unless I want to start making my daughters clothing, I can’t even dress her in the morning without promoting awful messages about what it means to be a girl.
The Ys
13 October 2011 at 7:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I worry about this stuff too, but I encourage my daughter to play board games that involve some mental activity – like Apples to Apples. That stuff can be pretty hilarious when you get a good crowd together. Likewise, my friends/family and I have taught her some cool stuff about maths and science to go along with other people teaching her about makeup and fashion. She and I both love Legos and build stuff all the time. I encourage her to write and illustrate her own stories as well.
She wants to be both an artist and a MythBuster when she grows up. I don’t think she’ll settle for less, and I’m ridiculously proud of her for having some kickass life goals.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
The problem is that he immediately phrase this problem as one where the WOMAN has to make the friend or idol decision.
I don’t think that’s an issue of gender typing vs sexism though, I think that’s zerple just making up a rather bad example on the fly.
It sounds like zerp just needs to read some good books on gender typing, which probably wouldn’t hurt most of us, actually, to get some ideas on what a good specific book might be.
anyone have some good recommendations?
anything worth reading from this basic search?
http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&field-has-strip=1&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3A%26%2334%3Bgender%20typing%26%2334%3B&page=1
Louis
13 October 2011 at 7:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Caine #87,
My…Own…Beer…
I…I…I…
{faints}
{Gets up, suddenly realises he’s a human being instead of a semi human sexist yoghurt, straightens himself out, goes to the fridge}
Can I get you anything, Caine?
Louis
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:34 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
So, you deliberately paired a woman with a sexist husband? You knew that the husband’s behavior was sexist, but you didn’t think that was worth highlighting? That was a conscious decision: “Yes, this man COULD be the locus of decision-making here, but even though he’s kind of a better model for illustrating how to deal with the dilemmas imposed on all people by rigid gender roles than the woman is, I’m going to go ahead and make the woman the locus of gender-role-challenging decision-making here anyway.”
Since it was a conscious decision, it should be pretty easy to explain why you made that choice. So let’s hear it.
I suppose, yes. I am a warrior type myself and I tend to date them. But that doesn’t have anything to do with an alleged anti-male bias. The point is that the man in your scenario was behaving in ways that render him indistinguishable from a misogynist. The woman he’s married to, the woman he claims to love and cherish above all others–he wants her to subordinate her life goals, her career, and her paycheck to his ego. I would not like a person who thought this was an okay, not at all. Not to be friends with, and definitely not to be married with. Not because he has a penis, but because it’s an assholish, sexist move. Whether he chooses to confront his mates about it is his business, but by choosing to confront his wife about it and make his emotional comfort her responsibility, at a HUGE cost to her, is an aggressive, cruel thing to do. Such a person does not deserve and consideration for his emotional pain.
That you think he does is revealing, as I said, of your sexist assumptions and male privilege.
julian
13 October 2011 at 7:34 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
*delurk*
Game was bugged to hell when I first played it and the plotlines weren’t nearly thought out enough. But, you’re 100% right about the character set, very diverse as far as sexuality and gender go. Just not very deep. Love Veronica and Boone, though.
*/delurk*
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:34 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You need to read better if you think this proves your point.
She is concluding from your actions a part of your character rather than judging actions based on a perceived character. Saying someone who says sexist bullshit is probabbly sexist isn’t an ad hom.
Now I’ve concluded you’re sexist AND stupid.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
or maybe here?
http://www.questia.com/library/psychology/social-psychology/gender-stereotypes.jsp
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
pHred:
Actually, cooking is far from a limiting role for men. The majority of chefs continue to be men and women chefs still find themselves having to work harder and be better in a professional kitchen. Have a chat with a few women chefs one of these days.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:36 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
An ad hominem attack on you, Zerple, would be:
“Zerple is a sexist, therefore his argument is invalid.”
What I am saying is:
“Zerple is making arguments that rely on sexist assumptions. Therefore his arguments are indicative of a sexist mindset.”
Is it hard, being so stupid?
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Save for bad lag in Gomorrah it seems to be working fine for me. And the hilarious bug of having what was supposed to be a dead prostitute you find actually up and walking around. I could ‘talk’ to the NPC and get the dialogue “THIS WOMAN IS DEAD” as her background dialogue is offering sex. Very wrong but very funny.
Pharylon
13 October 2011 at 7:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
<br
It’s not that bad. There have been a lot of gains in the last few decades. There’s more work to be done, absolutely, but it’s getting better! And while there are certainly a few people who still think that way, there are a lot less than there used to be, and they’re increasingly being marginalized. Blatant sexism isn’t as looked down upon as racism is yet, but one day, hopefully, it will be.
In the mean time, there’s work to be done, but let’s not forget the great gains that feminist leaders have made in the past.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
or, lastly, here?
http://www.questia.com/library/sociology-and-anthropology/gender/gender-roles.jsp
(depends on how you phrase the topic as to what lists pop up)
ladyh42
13 October 2011 at 7:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I had to keep myself from getting mad at PZ’s last statement, but then I remembered this one time that I had an argument with my ex partner about feminism. He had decided that feminism wasn’t needed and I made a long list of things that still needed to be done. Finally I just said that if women didn’t fight for our rights, no one else was going to do it for us, which he begrudgingly conceeded.
I’ve been in Zerple’s situation, twice. I couldn’t understand when my first husband complained that I was making more money than him why that was a problem, because we HAD MORE FREAKING MONEY!!! Who cares who is making it. How about instead of whining, the man tries to find a better job/friends if it bothers him so much.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Thank you, Louis, you’re a dear. I’m fine, I have tea. Tea is good.
Aquaria
13 October 2011 at 7:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
. You go on become a successful software developer, you make $70k/yr. I become a construction worker, and I pull $30k/yr. I will be actively mocked by everyone in the world
No, you won’t. My husband and I had a similar situation until recently, and nobody said a fucking word about him. They talked about me, making snide remarks about me being a ball-breaker and a control freak, and how did my poor saint of a husband put up with me.
Godless Heathen
13 October 2011 at 7:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
What? Why aren’t you helping us? We need women AND men out there fighting these things! Be an ally.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ing:
“Now I’ve concluded you’re sexist AND stupid.”
Nothing I have said has been sexist. If you think any of it is sexist, you are either trolling, or mentally deficient, or just jumping on the bandwagon with the other trolls in this thread.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I apologize for the numerous typos in my next-to-last post. I hope the meaning still comes through.
I still maintain that a man, a husband, who thinks it’s A-OK to pressure his wife to give up her career just to save his ego is being a sexist asshole, and Zerple attempting to chastise me for ignoring this hypothetical asshole’s emotional pain is very revealing of a misogynist mindset on his part.
Toiletman
13 October 2011 at 7:40 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You need more clever topic lines. This is somehow what most posts except those about Ftb are about. This stupid superficial girl games are part of appeal markets and what parents think their daughters should be. Also judging from my own peers, many girls want that,too. What can you do against that? Have daughters and educate them better. Yours sons,too.
I don’t understand why it made you angry though. It’s the digital extension of female-stereotype barbie. Didn’t you expect something like that exists? There’s much worse on the market: those that appear to be actual education material and foster those stereotypes. This is so overly stereotypical that it is rather comical for a grown up. “Lady Popular”. Can’t wait for the next title “Lady School Drop-out” and “Lady Teenage pregnancy” and or a boys version that shows boys that everything not involving sports and beating up others makes them gay and go to hell.
BeeG
13 October 2011 at 7:41 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Also enjoy the new release of Dr. Pepper 10…. Dr. Pepper Ten … marketed as “not for women”
pHred
13 October 2011 at 7:42 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ Caine, Fleur du Mal
That is exactly when I meant, though it was a side thought so I did not express it very well – I know perfectly well that cooking is not marginalized for men (mostly) but it was being used over and over as an example for some reason. I don’t need to talk to chefs – I already know several of both genders, which is why this repeated observation surprised me.
I am supposed to be grading papers! Not reading a blog.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 7:42 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Shibujiro
But now you’re taking my point and applying it to a completely different situation to what I was describing. Of course it doesn’t fit. You’re not arguing against my point at all.
You’re also ignoring the fact that when male attributes are assigned to a woman it is usually intended as praise. “She’s got balls” is an excellent example.
There is also another element to insults relating to gender roles, namely referring to a person as homosexual. Many insults directed at males goes along the lines of the man being gay. Insults like the ones in your example goes along the lines of a woman being “accused” of being a dyke.
My point here is that nearly all of these insults are either carried by sexism or homophobia. In my previous point I was focusing on the sexist ones as it was relevant to the post I replied to.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:42 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Fucking idiot
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 7:43 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Please, somebody tell me that the video-game description is a Poe
I don’t mind if you’re lying.
By now I think we can form a club: Concerned parents of daughters who have an urge to burn Hello Kitty dolls.
And the MRAs have already showed up, how nice of you to come by. I wouldn’t know what to make for dinner if you hadn’t.
Louis
I think I love you.
Here’s your sammich*
*It was time for the ham anyway. I hope you don’t mind the colour green
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:43 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
In response to ““Now I’ve concluded you’re sexist AND stupid.””
Shorter Zerp: “HEY HEY HEY! I AM NOT SEXIST!”
The Ys
13 October 2011 at 7:44 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ Zerple Derple:
Who said they weren’t? No one.
What they’re saying is that the effects are disproportionate.
Can you grasp the difference between:
“Hey dude, we’re laughing at you because you don’t make as much as your wife!”
and
“You have to quit your well-paying job with benefits RITE NAO because I’m getting mocked at work. You will then go on to make less money and have worse career prospects than me because my ego can’t handle the fact that you’re helping to make life better for our family.”
Seriously, you think a guy getting laughed at is worse than a woman having her husband demanding that she quit her really awesome job based solely on the fact that she makes too much money? Especially considering how tough it is to find jobs that pay so well?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:44 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Nothing I have said has been sexist.
you’re getting defensive, and not understanding why they are criticizing your example.
your example is flawed in exactly the way they point out it is.
red pill moment yet?
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ugh, I’m done feeding the trolls, time to talk to new people.
@Aquaria: Yea, I’ve heard that too. The problem is still gender roles, just in reverse. For a year, my wife has been a college student and a housewife. People have assumed automatically that I was forcing her to stay home and that I was some sort of patriarchal tyrant.
In reality, we found an economically viable lifestyle that covers both of our needs. In May when she graduates, she’s going to start working as a personal trainer and we’ll adjust how housework works.
The problem there, is again, gender roles, but in reverse. Changing expectations is not a solution. Eliminating expectations is.
Godless Heathen
13 October 2011 at 7:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple @22:
This. A million times.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
ladyh42:
That’s the thing, right there. No one should care. However, the sexist standard is that the man makes the primary money (which pays the bills, the mortgage, car payment, etc.), while if the little lady works, well, that’s just pin money for groceries and maybe a new dress.
For so many years it was seen as both an insult and a sign that you were lower class or even *gasp* poor, if your wife worked – that you, as a man, were unable to properly carry your weight, meet your responsibilities, ya know, be a man.
That attitude is still so prevalent, the stench of it wafts everywhere. If men, who happen to be with a woman who makes more money, don’t manage to figure out “hey, that’s great, we have money!” and get that message across to other men, nothing is going to change.
Just like men need to tell buddies who think sexist or rape jokes are funny “hey, that’s not funny, what’s wrong with you?” Men with partners who make more money need to tell other men “hey, I think it’s great! Do you know, we have enough to take a vacation to ____ and I can get that truck, and we can get the kids _____” If more men did that, the other men would soon get the idea and shut up.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 7:47 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As horrible as it may be… I do think the problem arises from our biological state.
No matter how hard we try, how much reason we put into it….
instincts will take over.
It’s not a mirror of our cultural values, to be more impressed by a football superstar, or to have half naked women prancing on TV…
it’s a mirror of our visceral instincts.
No matter how much education… most boys, if offered the choice between watching a half naked woman or listening to a conference of an intelligent woman… will choose the half naked woman.
My point is… sex will ALWAYS sell, and it seems to sell a lot better to men then to women. Which has many implications in our society. (women who use this, gain more power vs men etc..)
To solve the issues, I think we’d have to accept it as part of human nature, and figure a way to live with it all while avoiding injustices…
I have no clue as to how that can be done…. other then making all leaders be women.
But until now, we’ve been fighting against this nature… and I don’t think that’s a battle that can be won…
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:47 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Your conviction that we should feel some sympathy for the emotional pain of a hypothetical misogynist who’s married to a career woman seems pretty sexist to me.
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 7:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ichthyic: I’m getting defensive because I’m under siege by like 5 trolls. Once again, my example was intentionally constructed to show how gender roles hurt people. It was hastily written, and not terribly great, but it gets the job done.
As you’re not trolly, and you and I seem to understand each other pretty well, could you please explain the objections to my story?
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Deep thoughts, people. Deep, deeeeeep thoughts. SO DEEP! DEEPITY!
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Godless Heathen:
:headdesk: PZ is a feminist. FFS, to you and the others saying the same effing thing, the last line was a joke and a statement on the social climate.
pHred:
Get to work, you slacker! Now! Make money!
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 7:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To further elaborate on it:
It is also meant that you can’t be both:
A succesful COE (who might be the exactly same asshole idiot totally devoid of human decency as all the other ones) and a woman.
They are also more negatively judged for behaving the way men act. They get approval for the same action that gets her disdain.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:52 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To quote Mark Twain “Horseshit!”
Oh Please
Saying more about yourself than anyone else, cupcake.
Shorten to ‘I have no clue’.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 7:52 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Just wanted to precise that my earlier comment is an impression I have, which is most probably altered by the fact I live in and am continuously surrounded by a sexist society.
Does sex really sell better to men then to women?
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:52 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
From your assholerly apparently anyone who disagrees with you is trolly. I explained it perfectly fine.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Aauugh. No no no no no no no no. Shut up now or we’ll go on idiocy overload. The ship will go down…aarrggh.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Romance novels. Fabio. Old Spice Guy. Twilight.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 7:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Zerple
That is a variation of homophobia, which is a related issue, and as strong an influence on insult-language as sexism towards women. So sure, not everything is based on sexism, there is homophobia too. However the majority of these kinds of insults are one of those two. The only male-based insult I can come up with is being a “dick” which implies being insensitive. But being insensitive to a degree is expected of men, so it is hardly comparable to many of the counterparts …
Well, then we strongly disagree. To me the idea of femininity being inferior underlying these insults is rather obvious. As a guy who has an ambiguous gender identity, I have experienced the idea that feminine traits are supposedly inferior many times. Granted, I find the idea ridiculous and as an adult don’t care, but the intent of the insults and comments are unmistakable.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 7:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Your intention did not match the outcome. I think that’s where the disconnect is coming from.
Your scenario illustrated how gender roles hurt women. The man in your scenario was using his male privilege to avoid the hurt caused by gender roles by passing the pain, and the responsibility for dealing with it, to his wife.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 7:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
…Ah, so this is where y’all went.
*glances over thread*
*places a basket under Johan Fruh to catch the expected blood and chunks*
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m getting defensive because I’m under siege by like 5 trolls.
defensive person gets defensive about reacting defensively.
take.
a.
breath.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan:
Yeah, we got that cupcake. You are seriously in need of an education and I seriously hope you don’t have children.
Stop talking now, the hole you’re in is already very, very deep.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 7:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing,
Are you saying that instincts have absolutely no effect on our society?
Or that women and men in general, have absolutely no difference in their instincts?
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Johan
It amuses me that we actually have someone arguing my satirical “All men are evil rape monkeys” theory in earnest.
Cerus
13 October 2011 at 7:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Have humans always been like this? The whole “Women vs. Men” thing? I’ve heard of various cultures where the dynamic was reversed, but never of one where it didn’t exist at all, why haven’t we figured this equality thing out yet?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s a shame you aren’t including women in your definition of people, except as an illustration of how men are so terribly hurt.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 7:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
No.
chaos-engineer
13 October 2011 at 7:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I think the whole business about male-female wage expectations is a red herring. The article up above was about sexist stereotyping in videogames.
Surely any “What about the men?” argument should be emphasizing that men are harmed by sexist videogames, too. For example, male-themed videogames tell me that if I’ve been hit with a shotgun blast, blown up in an explosion, or just generally been knocked down to 5% of my health, then all I need to do is run next to a first aid kit and I’ll be fully healed of all physical and emotional trauma. Supposedly I’ll be ready to go back to work that very instant. (And by “going back to work”, I mean *getting shot at some more*!) What kind of example does that set for children?
Can somebody (other than me) do something about this? Thanks in advance!
pHred
13 October 2011 at 7:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Okay – well this was actually more coherent than the papers I was grading until the biology idiot showed up. You have got to be kidding. At least that should force me back to grading.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 7:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
could you please explain the objections to my story?
not without basically just repeating them.
take a time out.
rather than look at the criticisms as an attack, instead try seeing it as constructive instead.
what if they are absolutely correct? How would you change what you wrote?
*shrug*
Is there a point in trying to defend something that didn’t do the job of communicating what you wanted to?
instead, take a step back, let it sit for a while, and see if you can come up with an alternative way of trying to communicate what you want.
all you are doing now is reinforcing negative feelings towards you, and that can’t be productive, for anyone, right?
….
I should take my own advice more.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 7:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing:
And people wonder why we haven’t come all that far.
Shibujiro
13 October 2011 at 8:00 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ibyea
I know you asked me “Which one do you think hurts more?” thinking the asnwer was objvious. I don’t think it is. I think we all could use some consciousness-raising regarding the way society treats its males.
I’m not talking about being teased for being “girly” or making less than one’s wife. Some people seem to think this is the extent of it when it comes to short-changing males. It’s not.
The biggest one of course is that men die younger than women. There’s no reason to think this is genetic. It’s probably societal (stress, diet, behavior). Men get drafted. Men do the dangerous jobs. Men work their children’s childhoods away. And people make jokes about on national TV about a man mutilated by his wife and that’s OK.
We’ve had our consciousnesses raised by the feminist movement, gay-right movement, civil-rights movement, atheist movement. The very idea of a men’s-rights movement is widely scoffed at, especially ’round these parts. People just dismiss it out of hand, as if men have no reason to complaint about their role in society. I think part of the problem is most men don’t even realize how little power they actually have. We think we run the world, but the world runs us.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:00 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Reversed is wrong. Different is correct. Some cultures have less taboo against gender roles, some have weaker gender roles, some have places of honor for people who don’t fit into gender roles etc. Saying that the western idea of gender roles is a binary that is only “reversed” is incorrect. The nature of biology, and dare we say, instinct probably has assured that all cultures have noticed that there are differences between males and females. I don’t see how that’s relevant to OUR culture.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Are you saying that instincts have absolutely no effect on our society?
WHOAH! hold up there, cowboy.
please define exactly what you mean by “instincts”, and provide some examples while you’re at it before you go further.
some of us studied ethology for decades, you know.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
chaos-engineer:
No, it’s about the effects of entrenched sexism in society and the re-enforcement of sexist gender roles.
Cerus
13 October 2011 at 8:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ah, thank you Ing, that gives me a better perspective.
Louis
13 October 2011 at 8:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Giliell #126,
Green ham? Is it grazing on the salad? I’m not picky, but I draw the line if it’s developed the ability to make fire.
Louis
The Ys
13 October 2011 at 8:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I make a higher hourly wage than my husband due to my skills and education. Even working part-time, I sometimes bring home more money than he makes working full-time.
He has occasional problems with this, but reminds himself that WE have more money and thus more options with saving and spending. The only reason he still occasionally twitches is because his grandfather drilled it into him that men work and pay the bills, and women stay home to cook, clean, and mind the children. Because that shit is boring and time-consuming and contemptible, and women have to do it because men shouldn’t be forced to deal with it.
Amusingly enough, the grandfather’s second wife had to work because they had so many kids to support…
Once we get beyond the generations who teach this expectation, it’ll be easier on everyone who desires something other than these rigid gender roles.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Chaos-Engineer
Male marketed games tend to be pro-active, high energy or story based. In modern gaming a large emphasis has been growing to create the illusion that the player’s character has an active affect on their world.
Female marketed games tend to be dress up or cooking or the like.
Hairhead
13 October 2011 at 8:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’ve got a real-world sexist scenario.
I videotape depositions for court. I make about the same, or a bit less, than the legal stenographers, who are about 95% women.
Since we (videographers and stenographers) both are self-employed, in quiet times we bitch about the difficulties of self-employment. I can’t tell you the number of stenographers who have told me of being not paid by law firms for weeks, months, and often not at all, of how much work they do has to be simply “written off.” This shocks me every time.
Because I have NEVER not been paid by a law firm. If they’re late, or recalcitrant, I’m johnny-on-the-spot, bugging their Accounts Payables, their assistants, their paralegals, demanding the videos back, telling on them to the lawyers on the other side of the case, and in one large case, initiating a suit in small-claims court.
Where’s the sexism there? I’m a guy, most lawyers are guys, and they EXPECT another guy (i.e. me) to rank them out if they don’t pay up. The result is that I have very, very few payment problems. These same law firms who paid me up immediately will then screw around the stenographer on the same case, holding up her payment BECAUSE THEY EXPECT HER NOT TO MAKE A FUSS. And most of the stenographers — go along with it!!
Aarrgh! Every time this comes up I tell the stenographers how to get their money, and they tell me, “Oh, you’re a guy, they expect that!”, or “Well, I don’t feel comfortable doing it that way.” and so on and on.
I don’t expect to be treated like shit, I demand proper treatment, and I get it. Many (not all) of the stenographers expect to be treated like shit, and go along with it.
It pisses me off just to talk about it.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:04 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’ve heard of various cultures where the dynamic was reversed
you know, one time here I actually tried to search on societies that were gender role reversed, or were misandrist instead of misogynist.
I couldn’t actually find any.
I’m not sure there ARE any modern societies that fit.
I’m not even sure there ever even were!
let me know if you have some examples in mind?
24fps
13 October 2011 at 8:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Some of these posts should go directly to the “smart and potentially progressive men not getting it” file and promptly forgotten.
I’ve got two daughters, 10 and 14 years old. The best tool I can think to give them is the ability to deconstruct media. We started with Disney’s princesses (which are nearly impossible to avoid) and have gone from there. Teaching them to question why the princess needs to be passive; why skinny and pretty equals good and why not being so is bad; what else could the princess have done, etc. Every piece of media, every walk down the toy aisle, most of the pop songs on the radio have things we need to talk about. It means taking a lot of time and paying a lot of attention, but I think it’s paying off. Neither of them are conformists. So far, they’ve both been able to play with the typically feminine and mix it with the not so feminine (both of them practice martial arts and ride motocross for fun). Neither of them would like the game above, they’d vastly prefer Spore or something like that.
In my own experience, you can still like clothes and wear makeup and wear high heels and not become a walking stereotype. It’s about balance and independence. I don’t like sports but neither do I like frills. I can dance in 3 inch heels and I can shoot and swear like a champ. I don’t need anyone’s approval to do either.
Oh, and the dilemma of the construction guy? As a woman in that sort of situation, my answer would be, “As much as I care about you, you need to get over it or get out.” I recall saying something similar to my first husband. The current one is much more secure.
ladyh42
13 October 2011 at 8:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It was even better than that, Caine. I went to school, studied, and got the job I did because I was tired of waiting for all the “expected” things to happen. I was perfectly willing to let someone take care of me (christian upbringing, I got better) but finally I just gave up and did my own thing. It really hurts that my depression renders me unable to work every few years, because I really loved being able to take care of myself and my family.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:06 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Shibujiro:
So do women. (And before that, women fought in wars, all throughout history. So did a lot of children.)
So do women.
So do women. Often as single parents.
And people make jokes about women being raped on national TV and that’s OK. And people make Facebook accounts for the purpose of making rape jokes and that’s okay.
Ibis3, denizen of a spiteful ghetto
13 October 2011 at 8:06 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Comments TL;DR at the moment. But I just wanted to say I literally had to cry for a couple of minutes after watching that vid. The problem is just so big and the regressive push back so strong.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:07 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s a common mistake from ethnocentrism that everyone makes. It comes up in say, homosexuality topics. To say the Greeks have a ‘reversed’ taboo on homosexuality would be incorrect, likewise would it be to suggest that Imperial Chinese views on homosexuality are equivalent to the western religious taboos. In Uganda apparently you have a huge % that is 100% anti-gay they must be killed!….but when you phrase the questions to be about behavior and not “are you gay” you find a much larger % are engaging in homosexuality and not recognizing it. From just my armchair interested observer in anthropology this seems to come up a lot. Cultures don’t recognize their own prejudices or inconsistencies and can’t give an accurate depiction of themselves without large amounts of forethought.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s quite amusing that in order to come down against you they had to disrespect a woman enough to think they could take advantage of her.
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 8:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Nope, cupcake.
What people here are saying is that
A) We have a hard time believing that there are instincts that explain the horrible scenario of a woman earning more than her husband.
B) Think that humans can really master their instincts with intelligence and reason.
See, for example I’m totally not yelling and screaming at my computer right now.
Brownian
13 October 2011 at 8:10 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yes, but it’s easier to reduce other people’s happiness with 70,000,000, increasing yours by comparison.
Of course, if you believe the research of people like Richard Wilkinson, you’ll pay for it in the long run.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 8:12 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Wow. Sorry for angering some of you.
I do wish someone would reply with a little bit more then insults, as to effectively “educate” me…
All I’m saying is that instincts shape our society, and that I think male and female instincts differ on certain aspects.
Just as is the case in about every other sexual species…
In no way am I saying that any sexism is justified…
I’m not sure what you’ve interpreted from my posts… reason why I wish you’d be more precise in your response, so I could at least clarify or learn something…
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Too poorly defined to comment on.
How do the instincts of male/female frogs differ outside of coitus.
24fps
13 October 2011 at 8:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“As horrible as it may be… I do think the problem arises from our biological state.
No matter how hard we try, how much reason we put into it….
instincts will take over.
It’s not a mirror of our cultural values, to be more impressed by a football superstar, or to have half naked women prancing on TV…
it’s a mirror of our visceral instincts.
No matter how much education… most boys, if offered the choice between watching a half naked woman or listening to a conference of an intelligent woman… will choose the half naked woman.”
Right now I have am experiencing a visceral instinct to roundhouse kick you upside the head so hard…. Not very feminine of me, I’m sure.
This kind of bullshit sells both men and women short. You reduce the male to nothing more than his ‘nads and women to irrelevant except for their tits. The “men can’t help it” trope where they are slaves and victims to their peckers is just not a good enough argument. We feminists expect better from you. Not ask for, mind you, but EXPECT.
Real men are not ruled by their balls.
Teshi
13 October 2011 at 8:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m a supply teacher and teach a variety of ages of children. Gender-identification is one of the most powerful divisions throughout school. Children differentiate gender very early on and there are differences in the toys children seem to choose. One day I set up a game rolling cars down a long drainpipe. Everyone could play and I encouraged girls to have a go.
But something interesting happened. While girls were interested, and many had a go at this activity, it was the boys who started to dominate and the game became quite boy-heavy to the point that, while I was supervising a little girl asked, “can girls have a go too?” When I looked at the game again through her eyes I saw the game had become more boistrous and even though she was interested in what I would describe as a technological game she felt excluded simply because the game had become dominated by boys.
Please note this was not a game set up for boys. The initial participants were a variety of girls and boys. The girls were, perhaps, less interested and so the remaining girls who may have been more interested suddenly felt unwelcome simply because they were not boys (and maybe not playing the same kind of game as at the beginning– it was more technical and methodical and had become more about speed and how many cars people had).
I know we’ve talked about whether there are genuine gender differences or not here and I’ve always been an advocate that there are intrinsic differences– not in necessarily the toys children choose (although that seems to be part of it) but most often in the way children *play* with those toys. The problem is that there is a lot of crossover: there are girls who want to roll cars down hills in drainpipes (such as myself) but they get defaulted out of the game by the domination of boys and the way some boys play.
In the same way, although I have no anecdote to demonstrate this, I imagine boys get majoritied out of playing certain games: perhaps traditional girl games like ‘house’? Nobody’s telling them that they can’t play, or not providing them with opportunities, it’s simply that they are less likely to play when they are in a minority.
Ing
13 October 2011 at 8:17 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“Why”
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:18 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
The problem is just so big and the regressive push back so strong.
yup.
saw the same thing with racism after the Civil Rights Act.
-big push to show Americans that we all have the same rights, or at least should.
-Most Americans finally agree, Civil Rights Act passes.
-recognition that this is a historic problem that goes back hundreds of years and has had severe generation effects.
-realization that something like affirmative action programs needed to address the historic imbalances
-20 years pass
-people forget why we passed affirmative action to begin with
-people conclude the best way to be equal is literally to treat everyone EXACTLY THE SAME, regardless of the past historical imbalances
-affirmative action programs mostly dismantled in the US
-Fail
hell, we haven’t even GOT to affirmative action programs to really deal with sexism yet.
*sigh*
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 8:18 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To Shibujiro @158:
Lousy Canuck: The Disadvantages of Being a Man
As long as it’s not used to derail discussions, bash feminism or cover for misogyny, we’re fine with discussing how men get screwed by gender roles and what we can do about it.
Unaspammer
13 October 2011 at 8:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Bronze Dog,
I didn’t think so. Ridley is Samus’s arch-nemesis and was directly responsible for the deaths of Samus’s parents — in the manga, Samus was present when Ridley torched her mother. Her reaction to learning that Ridley was alive seemed understandable to me, not some female hysteria thing.
Agree about Adam, though. The subtext of their relationship throughout that whole game was creepily patriarchal.
The Ys
13 October 2011 at 8:21 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Thanks to a regressive health care system that disproportionately harms women, you guys are catching up!
http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/health/2011-06-15/female-life-span-growing-shorter?v=1308113664
Seriously? Do you have any idea how much of a physical toll it takes – and how stressful it is – to go through pregnancy and childbirth?
You realise men wrote that into law, and determined that it wouldn’t include women because they were girls and everyone knows that girls can’t use guns, right?
Uh huh. Try being an EMT like my stepsister, and having to wear a flak jacket for work because you attend inner-city calls and get shot at while you’re trying to save lives.
As do women. Most families either can’t get by on one income or are single-parent families.
And people see a female presidential candidate on TV and comment on how ugly she is and that we can’t have a president with PMS instead of commenting on the substance of her speeches. We have a rape epidemic in the armed forces and one member of Congress is speaking up for those victims, and Congress and the military refuse to address the issue.
Don’t you think it’d suck more to risk your life for your country, get raped, and then get told to STFU?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:22 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan:
You know, it isn’t our job to educate you. However, here’s some reading for you:
Toxic Masculinity, Part I
Toxic Masculinity, Part 2
Feminism 101
Things Happen to Men Too
Jadehawk’s evergrowing collection of feminism-related scientific articles (Read the comments for links)
Tethys
13 October 2011 at 8:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I would really like to see a good examination of human instinctual behavior.
How could your ever determine what is instinct versus what is due to cultural conditioning?
Gender roles are mostly cultural. Very few things about being human are based on instinct.*
*based on my limited reading on the subject
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 8:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Question for Teshi @179:
My question is: why, when you saw girls not participating, when a girl ASKED you if girls could also play; why did you assume the girls might be less interested in speed/cars? Why did you assume the girls just felt unwelcome later in the play session, when they were participating equally at the start of the play session?
What may have happened to cause the girls to feel unwelcome?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:25 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
All I’m saying is that instincts shape our society
Nope. Still not gettin it.
which is why I asked you to define exactly what you mean by “instincts”
but, you went on ahead anyway.
*shrug*
“What we have here, is FAILURE, ta communicate.”
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:25 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
A couple more:
XYOnline
The Male Privilege Checklist
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 8:27 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Louis
Nope, no fire yet, but it’s hunting the cheese
24fps
Would you mind sharing a bit more?
I’m really interested, because I have two girls and the older one, who is 4 is in the first phase of pink. And it’s simply not because she likes pink that much, it’s because she’S being told she must. Some time ago she told me she mustn’t wear the grey leggins because grey is a boys colour.
I nearly freaked out.
Teshi
And quite often, when you “remove” the boys, the girls will have a go at the totally “ungirly” activities.
I have hardly ever witnessed the girls playing football (soccer) with the boys at my daughter’s kindergarten.
At her birthday-party, there was only one boy who was already old enough to play football and suddenly the girls were all about playing football.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 8:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
A) We have a hard time believing that there are instincts that explain the horrible scenario of a woman earning more than her husband.
B) Think that humans can really master their instincts with intelligence and reason.
A) I’m not saying that it’s instinctive for a man to feel superior to a woman, or to not accept having a smaller salary than his wife… that would be giving those men an excuse…
Let me be clear… the source of that is stupidity. Most times, stupidity inherited through society.
It’s just that when I look at the situation of our society, I still have the impression that it’s foundations were sculpted through our collective instincts. (men thinking with their penises etc…)
B) I do hope you’re right. But I doubt it.
Capable of knowing when a compulsion is wrong, and ignoring it… sure. But mastering your instincts?…
Maybe the better term would be taming it?… it’s still capable of biting you in the ass though…
And thanks for the reply, and retaining from screaming and yelling at me. :)
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 8:29 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Heck, I was kind of hoping this one would come up. One of the reasons those jobs are so dangerous is that macho behavior by men actually increases work injuries. I just posted this elsewhere:
Source article
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:30 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Teshi:
Why aren’t you teaching the girls that it is perfectly acceptable to be assertive? Why aren’t you teaching the boys that it’s perfectly acceptable to be thoughtful and that girls are people too?
Godless Heathen
13 October 2011 at 8:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine:
Yeah, oops. I was reading quickly in between doing work and the sarcasm didn’t jump out at me. My sarcasm (or is it irony?) meter has been recalibrated now that I’ve read the comments…
*sheepish grin*
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan:
Oh FFS. No. The patriarchal mode was begun to gain power. It went from there to entitlement and privilege. That foundation has been rocked, but there’s a long way to go. We have learned over the years that womens’ brains work just as well as mens. We’ve learned that women can do the same work as men. And so on. Society changes, cultural mores change. This is *not* about fucking instinct. Get over it.
Go away and do some reading.
Shibujiro
13 October 2011 at 8:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@170
Maybe in your country, but not in mine. (I should’ve been more specific, but this is probably the general rule world-wide.)
@182
Thanks for the link. I didn’t see that.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 8:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Giliell:
How about grey leggings with a pink octopus on ‘em? ;D
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:36 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
How could your ever determine what is instinct versus what is due to cultural conditioning?
well, one, you’re probably better of using the term “innate” instead of “instinct”, two, other than things like reflexes (which ARE a type of behavior), there are relatively few human behaviors that can truly be said to be “innate”. In fact, most behaviors (other animals included) are a combination of innate tendencies or predispositions and environmental influences.
as an aside, this was of course how the Nature/Nurture “controversy” was “resolved”… there never really was one.
What’s more, in looking at innate (let’s call it genetic, because that would be the most base root) contributions to behavior, you have to decide at what level you’re going to start including the environment as contributing the resulting phenotypic behavior.
because, even in early development, there are a great many environmental contributors to what will become later behavioral phenotypes.
will you consider varying levels of different endocrine exposures during development? Is behavior at birth really “innate”.
I would say no, it isn’t.
this is why it is actually quite a complex thing when someone says “instinct”, because it has a long history, and involves an awful lot of background knowledge to actually understand beyond basic reflexes, like blinking.
yeah, you can’t just ignore all the history and science involved in human behavior, and claim “nature vs nuture”, it’s just not that fucking simple.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 8:40 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichthyic,
which is why I asked you to define exactly what you mean by “instincts”
Sorry, missed your question.
You’re right, instincts is a pretty vague term…
I guess I’m mostly talking about sexual compulsions, fear, and the seemingly male compulsion to “dominate” in certain species.
I wouldn’t say these three aspects are induced by society, but rather the contrary… societies show caracteristics that derived from these “instincts”.
24fps
13 October 2011 at 8:45 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“24fps
Would you mind sharing a bit more?
I’m really interested, because I have two girls and the older one, who is 4 is in the first phase of pink. And it’s simply not because she likes pink that much, it’s because she’S being told she must. Some time ago she told me she mustn’t wear the grey leggins because grey is a boys colour.
I nearly freaked out.”
I probably would have reacted the same way! I have come across similar, but I would act surprised, then ask questions. Who says? What other girls or women do we see wearing grey? Why is that? What do you think? What would happen if the boys started wearing pink? Who else wears pink? Which girls or women don’t? (the last was easy for me, I don’t do pink!) Keep it relaxed and conversational. She might still opt for the pink leggings, but at the very least you’ve introduced the idea that this is a concept to be questioned.
We totally experienced the pink and purple years. I think you’d have to go to great lengths to keep outside culture at bay to avoid it and censoring it just makes it more desireable. Just keep talking, it will fade. We moved on to shades of blue by about 6 years old with my oldest, and now they are both really torqued that everything for girls has to be pink and will choose other colours on principle.
We also tried to introduce alternatives to North American girl-oriented media – have you heard of Hiyao Miyazaki? He’s a Japanese animator who makes wonderful films, most of them revolving around strong, active female characters. Not a pink princess in the bunch! “My Neighbor Totoro” would be really suitable for a 4 year old, others your daughter would grow into.
Hope this helps!
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 8:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ichthyic – Just took a walk outside. When I came back, I saw your “Take a break” comment, seems we are on the same wavelength. Maybe I’ll see what you are seeing in the story, or maybe I just disagree with the arguments being thrown at me. It’s hard to differentiate rejection from ignorance, so it might take a while to figure out which one it is.
I feel better. Somehow Strange and I rub each other the wrong way, even though we seem to be arguing towards the same (or at least similar) ends.
@Teshi – I played “house” all the time (until I was about 5 and discovered the NES), so I guess I was one of the crossovers. However, the house game, was always strictly ruled by gender roles. My “wife”, a girl named Elisa, would pretend to do housework, and I would pretend to get ready for work.
I hadn’t told Elisa to pretend to wash dishes, and she hadn’t told me to pretend to be getting ready for work. We were both imitating our parents, and we were both the products of “traditional” southern families. Maybe these things are picked up by children from their home life very early?
I’ve spoken to my actual wife before about these “house” games. She wanted to play them too when she was little, but instead of pretending to bake things, her grandmother just taught her how to do it for real. I bring her up, because she was “homeschooled” (Which I swear is always a code-word for, my alcoholic parents don’t want the social worker to see my bruises, it definitely was in her case) and pretty isolated at that age and she still chose the “feminine” roll, in sort of a drive to emulate her grandmother, who was the nicest person in her life.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 8:47 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@158 Shibujiro
To paraphrase a Norwegian saying: “When it rains on the woman, it drips on the men.”
Sure, men have some disadvantages in society too, especially when it comes to expectations. This is especially the case for gay men and people with gender identity issues. It is also relevant to the nerds vs. the sports buffs case. It is also sad that husbands get mocked for having wives that make good money. But as Sally Strange has pointed out, there is a huge scale-difference here. And as I have mentioned already, much of these issues will evaporate with the equality of women in society. It will knock the ear out of much of the reasons this affect men too.
This whole “will anyone think of the men!!” line of argumentation reminds me of when Rebecca Watson did a talk on a skeptics conference over here last year and talked about female circumcision, and predictably, a guy brought up male circumcision. Sure, male circumcision is an important case too, bit the scale is a bit off to put it mildly.
… and frankly, if I was the guy making 30k and had the wife making 70k I’d be very proud of her. Getting ahead as a woman is a respectable achievement that probably cost her more than it would have cost a man. Especially in the US where things seem to be worse than over here. A difference I suspect has much to do with religion. The Christian attitude towards women is deeply rooted and very sexist. I wrote a blogpost about it a while back when I discovered the “Purity Ball” website.
http://blog.itsfortytwo.net/2011/08/fundies-say-the-darndest-things-now-also-in-pink/
Teshi
13 October 2011 at 8:49 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Teshi
13 October 2011 at 8:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Oh bother. I needed to close that blockquote tag, didn’t I?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I guess I’m mostly talking about sexual compulsions, fear, and the seemingly male compulsion to “dominate” in certain species.
but, even with those, there is a huge range of variability, even within our own species.
so, while it might be interesting to determine just how much, relatively speaking, there is a genetic component to any of those behaviors, it’s already obvious that all of them are heavily modifiable by environmental circumstances as well.
even fear:
ever gone into a lions den at the zoo?
hear that big male lion roar right next to you for the first time?
triggers an automatic fear response in most people.
the second time you hear it?
fear greatly diminished by your capacity to REASON that the lions are not an actual threat.
see what I’m getting at?
Tethys
13 October 2011 at 8:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Icthyic
If behavior=personality, then I will have to disagree.
Children are born with their personalities, and behave according to their personalities.
Example: I have an acquaintance who has twin girls. Their behavior since birth has been very different. One of the girls is very traditional in her behavior and interests, and her twin sister is very tomboyish. (sorry for the term)
I was very saddened to see the tomboyish twin be chastised for being unladylike and we had quite a discussion on what she is really saying to her daughter when she expresses a desire for her to be more ladylike.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 8:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
And why do they go along with it? Partly because of training: little girls are constantly told that it’s not okay to fight, to make a fuss. The same sort of behavior that gets lightly shrugged off when coming from boys.
Also, they correctly perceive that if they behaved the same way you did, they’d be labeled as “bitches” and their contracts would probably dry up.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
@ Zerple
I appreciate that you were trying to illustrate how sexism hurts both men and women. What I hope you can see now is that you didn’t succeed. You ended up illustrating how sexism hurts women, and how sexism enables men to hurt women, even in the context of an intimate, caring relationship. I hope you can see that this is revelatory of certain blind spots of yours, that you seemed to think you were offering an illustration of how sexism hurts men, but really you were showing how sexism enables men to be assholes to women and get away with.
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 8:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Caine
Embroidering on leggins is hell.
We solved the issue with a quick logics 101.
I asked her if mum was a girl?
-Yes
Is this mum’s wardrobe?
-Yes
I tore out half a dozen of grey items (ehm, I don’t have that many, I don’t like grey), so if mum is a girl and mum wears grey, there can’t be a rule against girls wearing grey.
We’ve been actively trying to show her even more that all colours are for all people.
And I can tell you, it’s not that easy getting bright colours for grown men either.
I’ve instructed her uncle and his boyfriend to please wear their pink shirts on Sundays (we’ll get to that clichée later)
Oh, and I’ve finished the “self-rescuing princess” shirt.
Johan Fruh
Oh come on. Apart from the fact that except for a few things “instincts” are poorly established in humans (really, what is nurture, what is nature?), through history and throughout the world we’ve witnessed the most diverse cultures.
Currently half-nakes size zero with DD-cups are deemed to be the hottest thing and you support that with instincts, but in other times, in other places, completely different styles just got the same reaction.
Hell, there are a lot of cultures out there where naked breasts don’t get any more attention than naked hands, the Americans freak out at the mere thought and in Saudi Arabia the naked hand wil obviously make the men lose control over their instincts.
Short version: bullshit
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 8:54 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
it. Get away with it. Man, I’m really off today.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 8:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple:
They really, really, really are. My search-fu is failing me, but there’s evidence that adults treat the same baby differently depending on whether xe’s dressed in boy-clothes or girl-clothes. Toddlers are expected to be more quiet and passive if they’re girls, and more active if they’re boys. Parents, teachers and caretakers often don’t even realize they’re treating small children differently by gender unless it’s videotaped.
I’ve got so many articles in my hoard now that I can’t find half of them, but here’s just one example: First and second-grade children already know that girls aren’t supposed to do math.
Math is Not for Girls: The stereotype begins early
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
sexual compulsions
did you know there are around 550 documented types of paraphilias in humans?
does it make sense to speak of “sexual compulsions” as “instincts”?
nope, too simplistic.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
whee! first fail-tag of the day.
Erulóra Maikalambe
13 October 2011 at 8:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You know what I really hate? If my daughter isn’t in pink, everybody assumes she’s a boy. Why is that the default assumption?
Just_A_Lurker
13 October 2011 at 8:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Count me in! Can we have a play group with boys and girls where they are free to play with makeup and trucks if they want? I would fucking love that.
And to whoever mentioned, Twilight, all I can say is FUCK TWILIGHT. Seriously, I was 16-17 when that crap went big and had to read it to defend myself. That is some serious, obvious drivel. I’m glad I read her book The Host first (I liked that one) because I wouldn’t have bothered trying to read it after Twilight.
Sex does sell to women. I like books with sex in it, but damn there are issues with that too. All those sexy ads you see add the sexy that’s supposed to attract women and then it sells it women as “you need this to be beautiful to get a man!”
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 8:58 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
They really, really, really are. My search-fu is failing me, but there’s evidence that adults treat the same baby differently depending on whether xe’s dressed in boy-clothes or girl-clothes.
this is why upstream I was asking for a good reference book on gender/sex stereotyping.
Most of us have likely had enough exposure to sociology and anthropology to at least have heard the basic arguments about gender stereotyping and the effects of it.
but, I can’t recall any specific books on the topic that would be good reads.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 8:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ah, the “biological” argument. Because extrapolation from your own experiences in a particular time and place, sans critical examination, to other points in history, in order to justify your conclusions, is totally science, yo.
Good news, everybody: I have discovered that female neanderthals love Hello Kitty. I mean, I love Hello Kitty, so it must be true that all ‘real’ women love Hello Kitty, too.
Excuse me, I need to go pink up the natural history museum here.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 9:00 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichthyic: hmm, what about “Delusions of Gender” by Cordelia Fine? Haven’t read it myself…
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 9:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Well yeah, but why has it been mostly a patriarchal mode?
Why have matriarchal modes to gain power been so rare throughout history?
Why is it so often lion males, male apes, and male reindeers acting like idiots banging their heads together to try and dominate?
And when you raise these lions, apes, and reindeer away from their social structures…. don’t they still develop the same compulsions to bang their heads and show their teeth?
I agree that a hell lot of today’s sexist problems are linked to society and not “instincts”.
But our society’s foundations were built way back when intelligence and reason were still very scarce… and what society deemed “normal” and “acceptable” have been passed on to present times.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I really hate that ever since my niece was born, my brother’s baby mama dresses her in nothing BUT pink, with occasional dashes of pastel yellow and violet. Fuck, she even had her ears pierced–at 2 months old! Teaching an infant who can barely even hold her head up that she has to endure pain in order to look pretty. Even if that’s not what she thinks she’s teaching her, that’s what she’s teaching her. It’s fucked up. I’m disappointed in my brother. But then, this is what happens: my parents tried to raise us without emphasizing gender roles too much. But they also never talked about what they were doing, and why. As a result, the influence of the larger culture seeped in through friends and school and TV and everything else, and my siblings and I all ended up embracing certain aspects of mainstream culture, in contrast to our upbringing, not because we understood it and chose it freely, but because it was just easier. It’s not enough to simply not abide by gender stereotypes as you raise your kid. You also have to educate them as to what gender stereotypes are, and why you’re avoiding them.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Source material on gender (someone left the bat signal on):
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=c3lhYfZzIXkC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=babies+treatment+gender+clothing&ots=hEh1qBLnoN&sig=sScK4bSj5ADvBI6Ho47diKI_pG0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Article some of us were asking for: http://www.springerlink.com/content/t13251654x54w75k/
More pending. BRB.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 9:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
mouthyb is here! I’m saved from my failing link-fu! ♥ ~;>
Zerple
13 October 2011 at 9:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@mouthyb: I kind of like hello kitty. It’s colorful and simplistic. Escapism in any form is always welcome in my house.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:03 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
If my daughter isn’t in pink, everybody assumes she’s a boy. Why is that the default assumption?
check this out, it has a nice history of the issue:
http://hueconsulting.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-is-blue-for-boys-and-pink-for-girls.html
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:05 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
One of these is easily changeable, the other one isn’t.
So when people emphasize instincts (not easy to change) over culture (easy to change) as explanations, I get suspicious that they’re really interested in throwing up their hands and saying “why bother? It’s impossible anyway.”
Evidence shows that change is clearly possible. Whether people are overcoming innate behaviors or just transforming learned ones. So what’s your deal, Fruh? You interested in change, or are you interested in exploring the reasons why change is hard? Action, or excuses?
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:07 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
It’s Mormon abstinence porn.
Google the phrase and you will discover a wonderful takedown of the series by a woman who’s a lapsed Mormon. Truly awesome.
LS
13 October 2011 at 9:08 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To say that the economics of ending gender discrimination are a ‘Zero-Sum Game’ may, in fact, be true.
But, so what? So, some guy making $100,000 in a position where a woman is making $50,000 might have to take a pay cut, or not get a raise so that the woman can make more. How is this a bad thing?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichthyic: hmm, what about “Delusions of Gender” by Cordelia Fine? Haven’t read it myself…
that’s just it; it would be good to get recommendations on this topic of books or articles (peer reviewed, I mean) from those that people have read and found useful.
I wish I could recommend one myself, but as I said, my knowledge comes as bits and pieces from various courses in psychology and sociology and anthropology.
there were some titles in the lists I posted earlier that got good “customer” reviews, and were written by people whose credentials on the issues seemed relevant, but…
always prefer to filter the titles I tackle myself. I tend to lend a lot of weight to book recommendations made here.
Matt Penfold
13 October 2011 at 9:11 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Not exactly what you seem to be after, but I have heard good thing about Cordelia Fine’s Delusions of Gender: The Real Science Behind Sex Differences.
Not read it myself, but it is on the list of stuff I plan to.
Tethys
13 October 2011 at 9:12 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan Froh
http://www.ted.com/talks/susan_savage_rumbaugh_on_apes_that_write.html
Savage-Rumbaugh’s work with bonobo apes, which can understand spoken language and learn tasks by watching, forces the audience to rethink how much of what a species can do is determined by biology — and how much by cultural exposure.
Dhorvath, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichtyic,
I seem to recall a lot of what I learned came out of the Nurture Assumption, but I did read it some years ago and might be inserting things from elsewhere. It certainly impacted how I looked at developing children and the cultures that affect them.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 9:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Sally Strange
That’s pretty messed up!
I have three nephews and luckily they don’t seem to suffer any such extreme stereotyping though they get their fair share of boy’s toys. But then, they seem to like that anyway. My sister and her husband are quite religious though, and I am worried about those Noah’s ark books they give them. But that’s another issue. I need to buy them some books about dinosaurs for Xmas!
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Their behavior since birth has been very different.
*sigh*
but you haven’t ruled out any effects on differences in developmental environment ON those behaviors.
which was my point.
seriously, try a class in developmental biology.
Erulóra Maikalambe
13 October 2011 at 9:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ichthyic
Very interesting. I’m still not sure why “don’t know” = boy, though. It’s got to be related to the tendency to assume an internet commentor of unspecified gender is male.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:15 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
More:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w77382423043083r/
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1129489
http://www.jstor.org/pss/27640879
(While parents (in the study) do welcome gender nonconformity in their daughters, it is because the preferred gender is a particular brand of male.)
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=s6aLf5Ig_K8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA289&dq=babies+treatment+gender+clothing&ots=xYidNjjjDK&sig=PYwxP0FGYGz1nmdCtCY1QAvUIrc#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ilR5D4vnuv4C&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=babies+treatment+gender+clothing&ots=Cj2ptucym7&sig=Vom4mxEapSL3mS1zjxpUOuwT4ZI#v=onepage&q&f=false
(Book about the denial of gender inequality and what effect that has on women.)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9507.00207/full
Hazuki
13 October 2011 at 9:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Game-wise, I grew up in the SNES era, and Final Fantasy 4 and 6 (known as 2 and 3 back then) were some of my favorites. 6 especially had a pretty powerful set of women characters, and they essentially drove the story, Terra in the first half and Celes in the second half. Yes, Celes had some real eye-rollers with Locke, but it occurred to me, “here are women who naturally learn magic AND wear heavy armor AND fight to save both the earth and the people they love.” (Terra being able to one-shot the end boss with 2x Atma Weapon, a Genji Glove, and an Offering while in Morph doesn’t hurt either…).
Rydia and Rosa could probably have taken down Zeromus on their own at the end of 4, too. And then there was the Metroid series. Super and Fusion are still two of my favorite games. Point is, I didn’t even think of any feminist message here; these were women, and they were powerful, and they did what they needed to do because it needed to be done.
But these are all, well, older games. I notice that since 1995 or so, “strong female character” seems to mean “male character with boobs.” It’s like someone went “vaginas and emotions are complicated and frightening, i want a woman who’s juuuuust like me but with big knockers, hurr hurr, ’cause I’m not gay.” This is a disturbing trend. Even Samus Aran got utterly Chickified with the Zero Suit model and, especially, Other M. Why is this happening?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 9:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Giliell:
Um, appliqués?
Pink. The ever ubiquitous pink. I rarely wear it, most shades don’t look good on me. However, Mister looks stunning in most shades of pink.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
… I’d note that you’re probably confused because you think “twins” seems to support your conclusion the behaviors are innate and uninfluenced by developmental environment.
…but you’d be wrong.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:16 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ Johan Froh:
Is baboon behavior innate or learned? How relevant is that question?
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 9:18 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Not only that, people get angry if you friendlyly correct them that the kid’s a girl (my second one is thankfuly still too young to respond to that bullshit. She also looks horrible in pink)
If I’m in the mood I educate people that historically, pink was the colour of the boys. Red was the men’s colour, the colour of blood, agression, courage, battle.
Pink is “the little red”. Dye was expensive and children’s clothes have a lot of wear and tear, so the boys got the cheaper version.
Blue, on the other hand, was the colour of virtous women. Seriously, how many paintings do you know with the Virgin Mary clad in pink? She wears a blue cloak, so blue for women, light blue for girls.
Twilight
There’s a good article about it on skepchic
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 9:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@220 mouthyb
Looks like an interesting book. I’ll buy it for my Kindle …
Would like to read some more literature on this subject.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 9:20 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Erulora:
Because males are considered to be more valuable.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:21 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
While we’re on book recommendations, the book I found most mind twisting in terms of considering gender (that has nothing to do with biology) was Judith Butler’s “Gender Trouble.”
I’m not in support of some of her positions, but her examination of the constitution of gender in Western theories about sex and gender was pretty interesting.
It’s a bit of a…. watershed moment to realize that gender is socially constituted and that gender is not sex. I was stunned for days after that realization, as I looked at how much was attributed to sex (biology) but was actually gender (sociology.)
Just_A_Lurker
13 October 2011 at 9:22 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yep, I’ve read it. Its been brought up in TET before plus one of my friends at the time was Mormon, got a good look through her eyes then. The one time I allowed myself to be dragged out with her, we went on one of the group outings for single young people in her church. They talked about Twilight. I was so creeped out.
At my first job my manager was Mormon and supervisor was former Mormon converted to Judaism for her husband. Talking with them was very enlightening and entertaining to say the least.
I was calling it obvious due to the “plot”. Like “THAT was the big twist ending? THAT was a big battle? Are you fucking stupid or new to the whole human-girl/vampire-boy theme?” Not to mention that Belle never really got described very well, and the sparkling and UGH
Sorry, its a sore spot for me. I’ve been having to take down this crap all the time. I really have damn near nothing in common with people my age.
Dhorvath, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:24 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As for specific gender experiences as a parent of a young child, my son has curly hair and it’s generally fairly long. Often he will ask for it to be fastened so we have berretts and elastics to do so with. He also frequently wears nail polish on hands and feet and has a baby doll he named Lily. All of his toys are female and he will correct anyone who mistakenly thinks they might be male. But he is a boy and very fierce to correct that as well. I can attest, that at least for this specific example, even traditional female accessories don’t provide him with much opportunity to do so. It’s default boy, girl if you are sure, as near as we can tell.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:24 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Species8472: People tend to get a little offput sometimes when I mention it, but there are some really interesting examinations of the social constitution of gender in feminist and sociological theory.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 9:25 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I absolutely agree.
I’ve never stated that all men are like *this* due to instincts, and all women are like *this* due to instincts.
There’s a lot of diversity in cultures and individuals. Reason why it’s completely idiotic wanting to put everything in a box or a gender.
But don’t you agree that, through natural selection, certain genetic characteristics tend to be favored, and end up being more present in a select population?
All I’m saying, is that I have the impression that some of these characterstics have creeped their way into society, and dictated what is “normal”.
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 9:26 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Caine
OT
Only if I do it by hand.
I hate doing crafts by hand.
Applique doesn’t solve the problem since It would still have to hoop the item.
What works is embroidering on felt and then stitching that onto the item
SC (Salty Current), OM
13 October 2011 at 9:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Hey! I thought you read my blog! You just commented there recently!
*grumble* :)
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I have the impression that you’re not basing your impression on anything. Except perhaps a desire to avoid responsibility.
LS
13 October 2011 at 9:29 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
On the topic of gender inequalities, this ad popped up while browsing this thread. How terrible.
Sally Strange, OM
13 October 2011 at 9:29 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Just_A_Lurker,
glad to see you saw that. I will just say this, then: I am SO happy that fad seems to have mostly died down.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 9:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
LS:
Do you not know how adsense works?
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:32 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
But don’t you agree that, through natural selection, certain genetic characteristics tend to be favored, and end up being more present in a select population?
sure, but those differences for relevant behaviors we are talking about here are vastly overwhelmed by environmental (mostly cultural) influences.
there may be patriarchies everywhere, but you WILL find vast cultural differences in the division of labor across different human societies.
swansnow
13 October 2011 at 9:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
About clothing for girls, raising girls, etc:
I generally shop at Target for my kids. My daughter is 11. For both my kids, we only buy undecorated clothes, except for the occasional shirt from woot.com, or a shirt from a fun run or school club. Up til now most of her clothes have come from the boys’ section. The boys’ section has many advantages: their clothes are less expensive, more rugged, and come in a larger variety of colors. She also wears hand-me-downs from her older brother, so she has lots of cargo pants and shorts.
Because I knew they would be sharing clothes, I avoided buying typical “girl” and “boy” colors, mostly. So they have always worn red, yellow, purple, green, etc. I never made a point of saying “no you can’t get that color” but I only ever offered them clothes that I was willing to have them wear, and then they chose from that selection.
When they were younger they were always outside, wrestling, digging, playing in mud and sand, building stuff from scrap wood. So I only ever bought pants and shorts. I find skirts and dresses to be very impractical, and impeding of active play.
Neither of my kids have been hassled for dressing the way they do, and my daughter in particular sees the advantage of wearing tougher, thicker clothes. I’ve asked her if she would rather wear pink or ruffles or whatever, and she doesn’t. I’ve told her that should she want to try out different ways of changing her appearance – hair styles, different kinds of clothes, etc – she’s welcome to talk to me and I’ll see what we can do. So I’m pretty sure she understands that she’s free to be different if she wants, and I expect her to want to begin experimenting sometime in the next few years.
Now at 11, my daughter is developing curves and will soon not be able to wear boys’ pants. It will be a sad day, because almost all of Target’s girl clothes are decorative, sexualized, stupidly designed, etc. We will gradually do more of our shopping at Goodwill, where the selection is better because the clothes are not so faddish.
The last time we went to Payless, while I was looking for sneakers for myself, I let my daughter try on various heels, because she was curious. We talked about why someone might want to wear those shoes. Soon we will have to buy clothes for her band concert, and I will let her choose whether to wear a black dress/skirt or black pants. I will let her decide if she wants dress shoes/heels or not.
I’m sure she’s partly emulating my own style, which is very plain, and she’s partly just used to how I’ve dressed her throughout elementary school. But she’s happy the way she is, and when the time comes that she wants to experiment with fashion I think I’ll be able to trust her judgment, and I know she’ll trust mine.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:33 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
what the hell is wrong with my autotagging program today.
grr. I guess I better preview everything until I get it fixed.
But don’t you agree that, through natural selection, certain genetic characteristics tend to be favored, and end up being more present in a select population?
sure, but those differences for relevant behaviors we are talking about here are vastly overwhelmed by environmental (mostly cultural) influences.
there may be patriarchies everywhere, but you WILL find vast cultural differences in the division of labor across different human societies.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 9:34 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As I understand it, the default is to assume ANY people-thing is male. This really annoys me in storytelling where aliens and personified objects are male for no apparent reason. Why the heck is a nonhuman character, whether it’s a toaster, a seagull, a piggy bank, or a giant insect, always identified as a male?
*de-fluffs ten minutes later*
Sorry, all the complicated stuff about normalization of masculinity, privilege and viewpoint got lost in my ragefluffle. A salient point I can make, though, is that most people require SOME gender ID or other for any personlike entity they interact with. It’s more tolerable to assume that baby is a boy than to just not know. *sigh*
(if anyone really wants to get nuts about this, search for Storm the gender free baby.)
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 9:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@241 mouthyb
To me the distinction between gender and sex is rather obvious, but that’s because they don’t align properly for me. Still, it is rather confusing, and reading about it makes everything clearer. And I find the topic highly interesting in general.
You mean the “eww, sociology” crowd? Yeah. While I’m with the natural science crowd (physics) I find it a bit silly to reject other sciences because their data is more ambiguous or harder to interpret … or less exact as people tend to call it.
LS
13 October 2011 at 9:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine: Well aware, partially based on content of the site (and apparently gender/sexuality stuff pops up ads for stuff like this), and browsing habits, if they’re able to track you.
Just saying that the site is terrible, at first blush it appears to be a Russian Mail Order Bride service. A perfect example of gender issues if there ever was one.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:35 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan:
A. Single interpretations of sexual selection are not a simple enough mechanism to always be the cause for the existence of something in a population.
B. The question of what is instinct and what is conditioned is one of the more difficult questions in studying society. If you wish to make the probability argument that instinct is likely to have influenced reaction by itself, you need to define what you mean (as you have already been asked to do), which will put you right into the “crap, which one of these is just biology” problem. The answer which seems in my experience to be the one people end up on is that it would be impossible to have a control group (no social influences to confuse the reaction), so the question itself has no absolute (it’s just one of these things) answer. Even measurements of influence are problems using that criteria.
C. Instinct is not a catch-all term for effective; that which seems ‘natural’ to someone is not necessarily the thing they act on, which makes this argument over simplistic from the start. Many people have pointed this out, as well.
D. The use of instinct in that fashion is often used to justify reflexive and uncritical justifications of inequality and prejudice. Is that the crowd you wish to hang out with, ideologically? There’s a theorist at my university who wrote the following with another theorist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Natural_History_of_Rape
They uncritically posited rape as a successful strategy for evolutionary advantage and could not understand what was objectionable about that thesis.
I repeat: is this the crowd you wish to hang out with?
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 9:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Species8472: It does not line up for me either, but my family beat me until I thought it should have. Even when you have the nagging sense that there’s something wrong, it is still possible (because we’re social) to feel like you might be wrong about that sense.
Tethys
13 October 2011 at 9:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I haven’t made any conclusions. But please explain or link to how twins could be born from different environments.
Identical twins should have the same endocrinology. Would there be a difference related to placenta or umbilical cord efficiency?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 9:39 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
LS:
Oh, that one has been around for a while, going by the amount of people who have brought it up. I don’t see ads.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 9:47 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@255 Pteryxx
Hehe, true …
God is also male, and I recently heard someone say that he most certainly is. A woman would never mess stuff up so badly :)
As an old gamer who’ve played a lot of RPGs, my experience is a bit different. With the arrival of good ol’ World of Warcraft came a lot more female gamers. As usual, a lot of guys play female characters in-game for a multitude of reasons. What is referred to as gender-bending. Now, a lot of the female characters were played by girls or women, which caused a bit of a confusion. Soon sexism spilled into the game as girls obviously are worse at computer games than guys, right? I nearly always play female characters in such games, and never corrected people when they assumed my gender regardless of what they assumed. To me it made no difference, but people assume they guess right when they’re not corrected. It is interesting to observer how people treat you differently when they think you’re a girl than when they thing you’re a guy. Interesting experiment actually. The same happened on the game-forums where I mostly posted with one of my female characters as the avatar. I know several female players who played male characters too, and they had the reverse experience. They suddenly were perceived to be more capable.
Giliell, connaiseuse des choses bonnes
13 October 2011 at 9:50 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Thetys
To my knowledge, their environment can be very different im terms of nutrition (only one placenta for both) and hormonal environment.
But my google-fu fails me on peer review for this.
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 9:53 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Would there be a difference related to placenta or umbilical cord efficiency?
that’s one possibility.
but seriously, think about it:
you say these are monozygotic twins?
if so, then how COULD their behaviors possibly BE different without environmental influences?
My guess would be that the parents themselves somehow are reinforcing slight differences in behavior.
there just isn’t enough detail here to make any conclusions.
Kingjing
13 October 2011 at 9:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
After following that link, all I can say is that I wish I had a boyfriend named Car Washer who would give me fifty dollars a day to date him.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 10:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Species8472, I hope you’re becoming a regular, because I do exactly the same thing: presenting no gender at all online and letting everyone assume or not as they will. However, I mostly play male characters (or “other”) and I’m usually assumed male. (And straight male at that. I’m rather proud that I’ve been honorarily accepted into a gay supergroup and a lesbian gamer group at the same time.)
(Also, I THOUGHT your nym looked familiar. Hrr. Regular commentor or no, will you ever call yourself part of the Horde?)
Ichthyic
13 October 2011 at 10:01 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I wish I had a boyfriend named Car Washer who would give me fifty dollars a day to date him.
really?
seems kinda lowballing it to me.
footface
13 October 2011 at 10:04 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I agree that the way things work now are stupid and limiting, and they cheat everyone. But I find the proposed solution (create—and watch!—the right TV shows, create—and play!—the right video games) a little dispiriting. While media and entertainment might indeed help to shape our perceptions and aspirations, we’re not ONLY consumers.
Indeterminate Me
13 October 2011 at 10:07 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Way back in 1999 (about a millenium in Internet years), pioneering game designer, researcher cultural anthropologist and author Brenda Laurel* founded a wonderful little company called Purple Moon. The goal was to create empowering games for girls (purple chosen as a deliberately “cool” alternative to pink) – and for boys who wanted more story and less adrenaline and a wider spectrum of emotions beyond flight or fight. She stubbornly insisted on being data-driven, and to design games for how girls were, not how we wish they were – but, with a mission to help them become what they could become.
Purple Moon was (more than) a bit ahead of its time (sort of the story of Brenda’s life), and, for a variety of reasons, the business went under, and was bought by, of all companies, Mattel.
I had the chance opportunity to hear Brenda speak at a conference literally hours after signing away her creation (more like a military surrender ceremony than a happy sale), and she spoke spontaneously and from the heart, about the wonderful online community of preteen fans who had made a true connection to Purple Moon, and the heartbreak of having to tell them the news.
A few months later, when she’d had an opportunity to collect herself, she gave a great speech titled “Making Better Media for Kids” (first sentence: “I hate Barbie”.) The text of the speech is on her website: http://tauzero.com/Brenda_Laurel/Recent_Talks/MakingBetterMediaForKids.html
*Full disclosure: I’m in no way objective about Brenda Laurel. I am both a friend and a fan, and consider her one of the unsung heroes of humanist culture in our time. That said, won’t need not be a fan – or even agree with her – to find her talk interesting.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 10:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As far as the push back goes, I tend to believe it’s a function of the same thing which tends to cause social pushback: the belief that men and women should have separate spheres, as codified in gender and social expectations, and that women are ‘invading’ those spheres. This invasion justifies intensified attempts to ‘teach’ them to respect the limits and structures associated with their gender.
Video games are a great example (says the gamer who has been at it for the last twenty six years.)
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 10:12 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Pteryxx
I almost always use this nick online, at least when it’s available. And I read this blog frequently, and comment every now and then.
I have some 3000+ hours played on my 3 main characters in WoW, all female. I played since the beginning in 2005, but have more or less gotten bored with it now. Only played with casual players, never did any hardcore gaming. One needs to have a life too! Still, made a lot of friends in the game, some I have gotten to know in person. People who say these games are anti-social have no idea. Sure, you can hide there as everywhere else, but that is not the default.
Also:
FOR THE HORDE!
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 10:17 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Pteryxx:
I consider Species8472 to be a regular, as they’ve been around for a good while and while xe doesn’t comment with the same compulsiveness as some of us, comments often enough. :)
JoeKaistoe
13 October 2011 at 10:22 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@213
Simple, calling a boy a girl is an insult. Calling a girl a boy is a mistake.
I really have to object to this. I’m not sure how you define personality, but using myself as an example, I can point to specific and significant changes in my own personality due to outside influence. They were slow, but definitely changes.
@255
You forgot a few things that are almost always considered female. The big one being cars. Cars are something to be stared at, have posters of, be drooled over and be taken care of. Another example might be guitars. Essentially anything that is desired and must be possessed.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 10:23 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@270 mouthyb
Hmm, yeah, the dynamics of computer games is interesting. I’m well past 30 myself, and have been playing games since the 80s. I always preferred the story-driven adventure games, and to an extent the strategy games. Always hated the shoot ‘em ups.
I think World of Warcraft is an interesting game in many ways because it has hit a very broad group of people. It is quite unique so far in gaming history, say what you will about the game itself. They must have done something right. One thing is that they haven’t narrowed their aim in on the stereotypical gamer-guy, while not going in the opposite trap and aiming at stereotypical girls like the game in the blogpost. The game contains elements that attract a wide range of personality types.
Tethys
13 October 2011 at 10:28 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Because their personalities are different, and have been since birth.
Since they are genetically identical, the only conclusion that I can come up with is that personality is not based on genes.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 10:30 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@272
Actually, the main problem is the time difference between here and the US. Most posts have between 100 and 300 comments when I first read them so I kind of don’t bother to comment :)
I also usually read them from my office at the university where I don’t have the time to follow the comments. This one I caught early on Twitter and I have been home for the last 2 days being a bit sick.
DLC
13 October 2011 at 10:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
the issue is too complex to make a simple reply post possible, but I agree that forcing gender roles on people is wrong.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
13 October 2011 at 10:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Species8472: WoW is an interesting case study; the original games (before the MMORPG) were strategy driven and, in my experience, played most often by guys. Looking at the way that WoW attracted a wider range of players is interesting. I’ve heard it suggested that video gamers are attractive because they have a clear task/reward system for players which encourages repeated play (as a contrast to the world, which often has a very nebulous and inconsistent reward system.)
If I put on my social scientist hat, I’d probably blame it on a reaction to the need to increasingly diversify task structures and increasingly diffuse reward structures. A quest is considerably simpler at all steps in the path, and you know pretty clearly where it will pay off. I’d also blame the popularity on the increasing access to technology; I grew up with a computer, but most of my peers did not.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 10:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ah, thanks Caine… like I said, y’all who actually remember names intimidate me with yer social skills. <_<
@Species8472, pardon me for impugning you. (for the impugnation?)
I learned to RP in City of Heroes, and my two closest friends there identified that I was being abused and convinced me to seek help. Hence, I am here.
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 10:37 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@JoeKaistoe:
That’s sometimes true, but it overlaps with agency. If cars as a category are usually female, what happened to all the characters in Cars? Why are there only a couple of feminine Transformers?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 10:38 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Species8472:
You’ll note, I’m sure, that never stops anyone else. :D By the way, your nym has always amused me. A very intimidating species, to say the least.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 10:43 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Pteryxx:
Very true, however, I think what Joe was getting at was how possessions play in to it, with regard to a lot of male thinking. Cars, like women, are viewed as objects of lust, something to be possessed, shown off, accessorized, pampered, etc. The notion of agency doesn’t enter into it at all for many people.
For many men, women are used as a status marker, like cars, with their main importance being adding to the manliness of the man, his worth. It’s that whole alpha business.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 10:44 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@mouthyb
Oh, certainly the availability of technology plays a part, but we’re talking about a jump from some 500k+ players to,last time I checked, 12M+. That is a quite significant jump.
But yeah, I think you’re right that the easy rewards attract. The key here, I think, is that there are aspects of the game that appeals to the competitive and to the non-competitive or the cooperative. Your input gives you a constant stream of rewards. Of course what keep people interested is not very different from what keep lab-animals interested in the end :)
@Pteryxx
Never tried real RPing much, but I have tested it recently, it is quite fun actually. Also great that you found help online. I think for many people games are also an escape from reality. The community that develops in games are often underestimated though. On the server I played we had the occasional player die in real life as you’d expect from a population of 20k+ players. There were mourning events arranged in-game on several occasions where people showed up to pay their respect.
Esteleth
13 October 2011 at 10:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
One thing I’ve noticed is that many people will go around assuming that a nonhuman animal is male, even when presented with obvious proof to the contrary.
I got a rather rude lesson in this at a trip to the zoo. I was in the monkey house, looking at the baboons. Two baboons were mating. The female had rather large breasts, which were bouncing up and down in a really obvious fashion.
Someone in the crowd of viewers decided to make a comment about gay men and butt sex.
The thing about women on the internet is true as well. A pattern I’ve seen A LOT goes like this:
[Woman] *is present*
[Man]: Lol, there are no women here!
[Woman]: Um, hi?
[Man]: Tits or GTFO.
It gets frustrating after awhile.
NightShadeQueen
13 October 2011 at 10:46 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Johan:
I’m sorry, but you strike me as someone who randomly picked up a bio book, found some examples to support your worldview, and have been parroting them since.
I see your lions, apes, and reindeers, and raise clownfish, all social insects, rotifers, hyenas, seahorses, bonobos….
Behavioral biology is fucking complicated.
Bjarni
13 October 2011 at 10:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
An anecdote some might find amusing:
I’m a man, bushy red beard and all, and I get the pressure to ‘be manly’ and have an opinion on footy and cars and all those things.
So people find it a bit disconcerting when they see a large, bald man with a long beard sitting on the train sewing. It’s nice being large and intimidating enough to be able to do whatever you want, ignoring gender expectations, even if that’s embroidery :)
Pteryxx
13 October 2011 at 10:51 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
yah, @Joe I should have said ADDING TO Joe’s point. I blame being distracted by attempting to post during the commercial breaks in the Doctor Who episode “Cold Blood”, pardon me.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 10:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
Hehe, a Star Trek reference as you apparently know. I loved those episodes of the otherwise mediocre Voyager series.
Quite so. Especially for cars. The link is to beauty, but it is also clearly objectification.
Though I did name my first car after the girl I was in love with at the time. I was 19. But she also liked my car a lot, and I only told her about the name. It wasn’t quite a beautiful sports car either, but she didn’t seem insulted by that :)
Maybe there’s a difference with ships though? Traditionally they’ve had female names too …
There was also a tradition in the army to give your rifle a female name. Something I never understood the point of. There was also a link between that and having to “hit the bitch” as they said. Referring to people fumbling with the loading mechanism that needed some force to operate. I thought that was rather silly and sexist. I just referred to it by it’s serial number: 150272 :D
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 10:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Bjarni:
Good for you. :)
JoeKaistoe
13 October 2011 at 10:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@280 Pteryxx
I would guess that it’s because they are no longer objects, but people portrayed by anthropomorphized cars. I would still contend that non-personified cars are assumed as female, and the reasoning behind the non-assumption in the examples you provided are for the same reasons I stated that they are assumed in inanimate object cases. Bumblebee is no longer the object of desire, but a hero (which is almost exclusively reserved for males in cinema), so he can’t be female.
Also notice which Cars are male in the movie of that name. It sure wasn’t the workhorse trucks. It was the type of cars that are either “cute” or the desirable cars i.e. Porsche.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 10:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sally Strange,
Avoid responsibility? Just because I’m male and believe that biology has a link to how our society was founded, it doesn’t make me a cheating, mysogenic bastard.
I’m basing my impression on what I’ve seen of western and asian social pressures, and what I’ve seen of many different animal species’ behaviour.
While it’s very difficult, in social animals, to differentiate what is learned and what is innate. Many non-social animals display similar behaviour… in male courtship for example.
Or heck, even my late adorable male dog. Raised away from any father, and seperated from a mother very young. At a certain age, he would suddenly start “trying” to dominate all the males he could cross… especially the big ones. And also try to jump on all the female dogs he could get his paws on.
Put that kind of innate in a social context… and you get the system you see in wolf packs, with alpha males.
While perhaps flawed, or over-simplistic as some called them, my impressions are not to avoid responsibility… I’m a bit offended that you would jump to such conclusions.
And thanks for the article on the baboons. Very interesting, and heart warming.
Athena_Tam
13 October 2011 at 10:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Everyone is shocked by the couple who decided to raise their child as genderless, but why is this strange? Growing up one of the few times we would see our extended family was at Christmas and looking at the gift giving trends is still somewhat alarming even though my family is forward thinking. My brother got stuff for Christmas like “Build your own Radio” or “Canada Arm” or a radio control helicopters, I got “Paint your own Lamp *Now with fuzzy baubles*” or “Big book of friendship bracelets” or “Cross-stitch set” or “How to Knit”. As a society we make so many assumptions without really noticing.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 10:59 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Species8472:
Yep. Is it bad I always rooted for Species8472?
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 11:02 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
Absolutely not, so did I. They turned out to be pretty decent guys in the end.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 11:09 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan:
The mere fact that you’re linking cheating with misogynistic shows you don’t have a clue. I won’t get in to your use of bastard.
footface
13 October 2011 at 11:13 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
(Some) people assume all nonhuman animals are male? I’ve found that (some) people assume all dogs are male, and all cats are female. Even after they’ve been corrected about a particular cat, they’ll keep calling him “she.”
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 11:30 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As for the gender assigned to animals …
In my language (Norwegian) the subject has gender assigned to it, male, female or neutral (he, she, it and all that). “A dog” is “en hund” which is male, a donkey would be neutral, a cat would be female. However all female subjects can be male instead, but not the other way around (what you use depend on dialect mostly). This affect what gender we by default assign to these. “A human” is neutral, while “a person” is male and so on. There is no logic to it that I have discovered. Most people would assign a generic dog as male, and if you use the female form for cat, you’d call it a “she”.
This of course explains nothing for the English language, unless there’s something left over since the languages are closely related.
I think there’s a difference between these and the more specific issues we were discussing earlier like why cars and ships are referred to as women, names and all-
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 11:30 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Mouthyb,
Johan:
A. I’m not saying it’s always the cause. Just that it can participate to the outcome.
B. I’m not trying to write a thesis here, or even impose my thoughts. I’ve always stated that they were my impressions, and I’m happy to have been confronted with arguments and forced to think further. That was kind of the goal too…. I don’t see the point of posting my thoughts if it isn’t to get arguments in return.
C. Yes I was too vague in my initial argument. I should of put a bit more thought into trying to be clear with what I meant. Though that would probably have not changed their over-simplistic nature. There’s a reason it’s over-simplistic. I’m not an expert in this field (as you would have guessed).
D. I’m not trying to justify anything here. Many people seem to have gotten the impression I was.
I hate all forms of bigotry, and I do not think that ANYTHING can justify treating people differently based on.. anything.
Treat others as you wish to be treated, period.
I didn’t think that this was about who we want to hang out with..
Personally, I love to hang out with people who like to discuss and argue in a calm but passionate and constructive way about anything, no matter how controversial (or how silly).
I’ll stop here, and sorry again for angering some of you.
There are still some posts I find interesting and would of liked to reply, but it’s late and I don’t want to start writing any worse then I’ve done up till now.
Goodnight.
Johan Fruh
13 October 2011 at 11:31 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Mouthyb,
A. I’m not saying it’s always the cause. Just that it can participate to the outcome.
B. I’m not trying to write a thesis here, or even impose my thoughts. I’ve always stated that they were my impressions, and I’m happy to have been confronted with arguments and forced to think further. That was kind of the goal too…. I don’t see the point of posting my thoughts if it isn’t to get arguments in return.
C. Yes I was too vague in my initial argument. I should of put a bit more thought into trying to be clear with what I meant. Though that would probably have not changed their over-simplistic nature. There’s a reason it’s over-simplistic. I’m not an expert in this field (as you would have guessed).
D. I’m not trying to justify anything here. Many people seem to have gotten the impression I was.
I hate all forms of bigotry, and I do not think that ANYTHING can justify treating people differently based on.. anything.
Treat others as you wish to be treated, period.
I didn’t think that this was about who we want to hang out with..
Personally, I love to hang out with people who like to discuss and argue in a calm but passionate and constructive way about anything, no matter how controversial (or how silly).
I’ll stop here, and sorry again for angering some of you.
There are still some posts I find interesting and would of liked to reply, but it’s late and I don’t want to start writing any worse then I’ve done up till now.
Goodnight.
Dhorvath, OM
13 October 2011 at 11:36 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan,
Not all of us have the luxury of maintaining a permanent calm demeanour on topics like this. Don’t take it as a personal attack, so much as an artifact of frustration that you don’t share.
Lion IRC
13 October 2011 at 11:52 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Roll on atheist
sexismintellectual vanity“…Women, get out there and fix it, OK”
Women get out there and think for yourselves
Can anyone spot the irony here?
What about the transgender / cross dressing folk PZ?
Whose doing the thinking for them?
PaulG
13 October 2011 at 11:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Caine, 282:
The plural of anecdote…etc… Citation or STFU, as I believe is the correct response in these parts to subjective nonsense like this.
Species8472
13 October 2011 at 11:55 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Johan
It is easy to have a casual approach to misogyny when it doesn’t affect you. I am also minimally affected by it since I just learned to hide my female side. I have little first-hand experience with it after I became an adult, aside from what I sometimes experience online when presumed to be female. It is astonishing how quickly a disagreement can turn into abuse focusing on gender.
However for half of the population it is something they face regularly in one way or another. It is not hard to see it either if you actually pay attention to what goes on around you and talk to women about these things.
After “elevatorgate” I have discussed that specific topic with female skeptics I know, and this is not such a non-issue that many would have it to be.
Indeterminate Me
13 October 2011 at 11:56 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Dangerous to draw any sociological conclusions about human nature, group dynamics or social interactions from online multiplayer games (MMO’s). The current generation of offerings are so limited and skewed, they attracte a self-selecting and highly skewed psychographic profile, which tends to override normal demographic preferences.
That hasn’t stopped ludologists from writing theses about the topic, but, as with Freud, a skewed sample leads to skewed conclusions :-)
Caine, Fleur du Mal
13 October 2011 at 11:57 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Lyin’ Irk, still trolling, I see. As has been mentioned, PZ is a feminist. The last line was a joke and an observation on the current social climate.
As your usual habit is bringing up god and the bible, why don’t you just get to it already? Either that or shut up.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 12:05 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I see Lyin’ irk is working on his second banning. If it was at all intelligent, it would go elsewhere. But then, history shows it lacks any cogency…
Merridol
14 October 2011 at 12:11 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan,
I’m delurking just for this.
A. You keep saying instinct must have some role in how our culture is constructed.
If you mean that we have to have highly developed brains, thrive in social groups and develop rules to govern the division of resources, regulate cooperation and competition, etc. then you are simply arguing the existence of our brains.
If you think there is anything “hardwired” beyond this, beyond the *capacity* to develop rules and social groups, then you are waaaaaaay beyond the current state of the science.
The evolution of sociality is complex! It has happened in so many different ways that comparisons to other charismatic megafauna are useless to your argument. You have already been generously handed information on our closest relatives that shows that social dynamics are extremely plastic. This does not support your hypothesis. And then, we can’t even tease out biology from cultural inertia! So I don’t think this particular opinion is worth holding with any conviction.
B. As I see it, you have plenty of perfectly cogent arguments to work with. But it’s Pharyngula, it comes with some… shall we say… spice. That’s one reason I love lurking here.
C. So narrow it down a bit- what, exactly, do you think is being influenced? By what selective force? This will take you deep into the bowels of the behavioral sciences, beware! Here thar be modellers.
D. The arguments you made (or, if you prefer… the impressions you proffered) have been used, time and again, to justify really nasty things. So people get annoyed when they’re repeated ’cause, hey, we don’t know you. All I see is a vague, unexamined opinion being offered up in a context where it can be (and has been) used to justify sexist or otherwise damaging behavior. If you want to distinguish yourself from that, please do! With clearer ideas, or a demonstrated willingness to learn (ie to seek out information yourself and assimilate it). Best of luck.
Back to lurker mode, since my Pla Goong just got here. Yum!
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 12:12 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG
I think the important word is many. Not all men consider women to be a status symbol, but many do.
Donald Trump is an example
Here’s another. http://www.fastseduction.com/guide/
Note that the status is only with other men who consider women to be possessions first and people secondarily.
Species8472
14 October 2011 at 12:12 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@304 Indeterminate
Of course not. You cannot extrapolate from a gaming population unto the population as a whole. However the gamers are interesting in themselves, and World of Warcraft has a different population than its predecessors. Both in having more females, but also a wider range of males.
What caused this is obviously an interesting question as it has to do with what appeals to a wider group of people, especially females in this case, as more play this game than what’s usual. The game appeal to a lot of girls and adult women without being a silly stereotype of a game as the example PZ had.
The obvious answer I think is that the appeal is to a wider range of personality types rather than having much to do with gender. The game does not restrict you to a gender specific stereotype, you’re free to float wherever you’re comfortable regardless of gender. To play on the stereotypes, you can be a highly competitive girl fighting the best, or run around and pick flowers as a guy if you wish, or vice versa.
The result is that you find a very wide range of people who play the game contrary to the gender stereotypes. A lot more so than people behave in real life. That itself is an interesting result.
Species8472
14 October 2011 at 12:15 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
You must be pretty ignorant to not see the link between flashy cars and dolled up women and certain men’s need to show off trophies.
Cameron
14 October 2011 at 12:23 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Think PZ went a bit over the top this time. What’s the difference between this and Call of Duty or sport games?
I think it is a bit of a non-issue assuming no one is forced to play these games. As long as girls are free to play COD with the guys, which a lot of girls do and love doing, there’s not much of a problem.
If a mother is giving this game to a 12 year old girl and removing any other games from her, you might have a problem.
Then again, not every COD, BF, Soldier of Fortune, SOCOM, MOH wannabe guy wants to go out in the bush and kill people. Usually, the really good players at these games are nerds/geeks, not the tanned guys with 6 packs at the gym or the size 0, “like-totally”, tanned girls at the beach (not that these types of people don’t play the game, they’re just generally not the ones who play it all day and are really good at it).
I’d focus on magazines and TV shows before even beginning to worry about a game like this.
No offence, but it almost seems like PZ is trying a bit too hard, over compensating, with misogyny and inequality among sexes seeing as most of this talk is just that, talk. Of recent, too many posts seem to be focused on it with a lot of them being non-issues or largely irrelevant in the greater scheme of things (not that they aren’t problems) and wont make much difference.
PZ should focus on things he can change. My HumanEvo lecturer posts many links on a FaceBook page for her female students about inequality in the sciences and how other women have become successful in their fields. She actually has a chance of making a difference and PZ should do something similar (posting things about inequality amongst free-thinkers and atheists is a good start), not post about video games.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 12:24 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG/Monkey Genes/Pollution/JazzHands:
For you? No. All you’re doing is trolling and exercising the various grudges you’re holding. It’s a shame you were ever let out of the dungeon. Feel free to address your standard assholism elsewhere, Cupcake. I’ve seen and dealt with you on other sexism threads.
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
14 October 2011 at 12:26 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Johan: I was trying to be as neutral as possible.
The line about who you hang out with was demi-metaphorical. I wished to point out that the line of thought which states that behavior is primarily or significantly formed by instinct is used to justify some abhorrent behavior. The postulates and application of a theory, especially in the case where they are used to justify horrible things, are sometimes worth paying attention to for that reason; the classes of reasons a theory lends itself to can be emblematic of problems in the theory.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 12:26 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Cameron:
People wrapped up all warm and safe inside their own privilege tend to say crap like this. Thanks for telling us there isn’t a problem, really. Idiot.
Shibujiro
14 October 2011 at 12:30 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
To: The Ys @ 184
When I give an example of how society mistreats men, it is not intended as evidence that society does not mistreat women.
My point is simple. A boy is at a much greater risk than a girl, on average, of, say, dying prematurely (because of behavioral diseases, violent crime, war, suicide, etc.). That this system is imposed on males by other males doesn’t make it “fair,” but only goes to show that men and society in general don’t yet realize that there is a problem.
CTRL-F for my other posts for a fuller explanation.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 12:35 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sorry fuckwitted cupcaked. Any and everything you say, due to your past trolling (history is biting you in the ass), must be backed up with citations to the peer reviewed scientific literature. Or you shouldn’t even bother posting, as everything you say is considered lies and bullshit. You brought this on yourself. You put up or shut the fuck up…
mouthyb, whose brain is currently melon-balled
14 October 2011 at 12:45 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Cameron: The above game is a clear example of a problem. I’d think that if, as you say, you are worried about the problem, you’d appreciate a clear example.
Of course, you go on to tell us that we’re all talking about it too much, which leads me to favor Caine’s reading of your comment.
a_ray_in_dilbert_space
14 October 2011 at 12:55 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Here’s the thing about privilege: It cements social orders into rigid structures. People are afraid of losing their privileges–however limited those may be–so they support the privileges even of those oppressing them. It doesn’t work to simply try to dismantle the structure from the top, by changing the balance of power–you’ll be perceived as a threat. Rather, you have to start by seeing your own privileged status, then seeing how it affects others.
Men willingly assume the mantle of “being manly”, even with all its risks and stupidity, because they are afraid of losing their privileged position. Only by refusing the privileges society confers on us can we also refuse the role in supporting the privilege of the most privileged.
machintelligence
14 October 2011 at 1:14 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@ 186 Tethys
You might want to read “The Language Instinct”, and “The Blank Slate” by Steve Pinker. Language acquisition in particular appears to be highly instinctive (although which language is acquired is cultural).
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 1:22 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Not totally caught up yet (it’s been that kind of day):
Ing,
I ♥ New Vegas. Won’t be playing The Lonesome Road DLC until I’m done with Dead Island, though.
I ask you, sweet Ing, not to forget Fisto the pleasure bot.
If it’s the side quest I’m thinking of, it’s about revenge. Although it’s been a while, so I could be confusing two of them.
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 1:23 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
310, Species 8472:
So much fail.
1)Using the phrase “dolled up women” is projecting your own prejudices. Why should you care whether a woman is “dolled up” or makeup-free?
2)Why am I the ignorant one for not seeing what YOU perceive to be a “link” between men and using cars/women as statements of virility? You made the “link” (following Caine), so it is up to you to provide the evidence. Evidenceless assertions won’t fly here, Cupcake.
312, Caine:
Oh, Caine. The real shame is on you, and specifically the claim you made as quoted in my previous comment. No evidence, just a loud voice: that is all you have and all you are, Cupcake.
316, Nerd:
Ah, Nerd. What a simple soul you are, you delightful little Cupcake. Do you recall your recent drubbing by…memory block…was it David Marjanovic? or Morales? Apologies…in which they questioned your OM and pointed out that all you are capable of is spewing the same old tired nonsense over and over again? Oh, poor Nerd. An old man who has achieved nothing of note within the field of science, who works the night shift in an HPLC lab, who frequents this site to feel a sense of self worth while just puking up the same, tired old phrases time after time. Nerd: there is absolutely nothing you can say which will make me feel that you are my better.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 1:30 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Who’s trying to make a fuckwitted bullshitting troll feel better? I’m showing the lurkers what a fuckwitted loser you are. You have nothing cogent to say, and prove it by posting idiocy, such as the above. You have earned nothing here, and won’t until you decide not to deliberately troll. But then, that requires competency you have never, ever shown, such a providing citations for your inane claims.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 1:31 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG needs evidence that popular culture exists?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 1:34 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Oh, and PaulG, troll, this is a citation to a place where information can be found. Start making use of it.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 1:35 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Enough men think that women are like cars that people come up with ad campaigns like this one, which compares a used car to a woman who’s not a virgin.
jose
14 October 2011 at 1:35 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Everyone ignore that dumb game and go play Mass Effect 2 with female Commander Shepard.
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 1:38 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Nerd 323:
I’m going to assume you meant “such as”, not “such a”. To be honest, I have to make these assumptions each time you post your semi-literate comments.
If you read my original comment, you’ll see (with the significant caveat that you are capable of understanding the written word) that I requested a “citation” (one of your favorite words) for a statement made by Caine which was little more than cliched gender-based assumption. So I am not sure what citations you now wish me to provide; I called bullshit on a bullshit claim; it is not my responsibility to cite relevant literature.
In summary: you’re an idjit.
echidna
14 October 2011 at 1:40 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Cameron:
Are you seriously telling PZ what he should do on his own blog? You must have an inflated sense of your own importance in the scheme of things.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 1:43 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
How about you shut your ignorant mouth about chemistry, how about that? Huh?
Ing
14 October 2011 at 1:47 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Well other than Boone’s back story someone had told me that one of the side villains is a confirmed rapist. I’ve since taken care of him and it didn’t come up in the story but presumably there might be a victim or something out there.
elainethepirate
14 October 2011 at 1:48 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
sorry, too busy going shopping/to the beautician/the podiatrist (to treat my high-heeled caused bunions)/trying to ‘trick’ a man into breeding/being a whore/not being enough of a whore.
Steven Zuber
14 October 2011 at 1:49 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I’m going out in a limb here and assuming that that article is satire. That type of discourse is like 60 years out of fashion. Not that it was ever right to talk that way, but it was normal several decades ago.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 1:49 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ok PZ…really? Did you not see how fucking stupid it was to unban people like Genetic Splooge?
I’m sorry but I actually find it pretty offensive and insulting and callous to people who had to put up with their sexist garbage the first time around. Because there isn’t nearly enough Sisyphean arguments around feminism, PZ has to recycle old boss characters. Thanks a lot, fucker.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 1:52 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG/Monkey Genes/Pollution/JazzHands:
Okay, be proud of being an narcissistic asspimple. No one cares. At Pharyngula sciblogs, you were dungeoned for Insipidity and slagging, with the following note:
In reality, you’re nothing more. Your self-delusions matter only to you.
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 1:54 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
330 ibyea:
Please: where have I run my ignorant mouth about chemistry?
326 Sally Strange:
Did not visit your link, as I form my worldview on science, not youtube videos.
Nerd, 325:
I, like other real scientists (that is, those who discover stuff rather than getting told what compounds to shove onto the HPLC machine tonight), use PubMed.
Sally Strage 324:
No, Sally. PaulG needs “evidence” which has been peer reviewed. Using “data” from advertising, and viewing it through the feminist lens, will not suffice for me, nor any other real scientist.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 1:55 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Steven Zuber:
Things have changed. They’ve gotten worse. You aren’t the only person who has been around long enough to know what was going on several decades ago. By the way, a lot depends on how wrapped up in your own privilege you were when viewing things several decades ago. Just sayin’.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 1:59 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Again PZ; fucking bone headed idea. Accommodate assholes at expense of supporters, right out of Obama’s handbook.
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 2:01 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
334 Ing:
If you mean me, could you show me where, since the unbanning, I have deserved rebanning? I have tried to post honestly, yet within the rules, initially within each thread. When the usual suspects have abused me, I have come out fighting; I hope that it has always been them who have begun the bullshit this time, as I have decided that they are plenty ignorant enough to hang themselves, without any provocation.
Pteryxx
14 October 2011 at 2:02 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
*shrug* I’m willing to say that Nerd is PaulZ’s better, without regard to work-life bragging rights, based solely on how PaulZ’s acted in this thread.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 2:02 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
From what I have read of what you said about Nerd of Redhead, your implication was that he was less of a scientist because he takes care of HPLCs. As if it is so much less important. As if those things took care of themselves. As if the only reason to be a scientist is to win a nobel prize. That makes you ignorant. Maybe I shouldn’t have said about chemistry, more like it makes you ignorant about what scientists do.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:04 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Well, there’s not a LOT of scholarship on women and cars, but there is some. Nobody’s done a survey on men’s attitudes about it, as far as I can tell.
I guess that means PaulG thinks we’re imagining the whole phenomenon?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:04 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing:
PZ didn’t do it to antagonize us, the move to FtB was stressful and not having to duplicate and set up the dungeon was simply a way to ease things and address the million and one complaints the horde had about everything else.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:07 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sally:
Monkey Genes is trolling, nothing more. He chose that particular post to pick on because I wrote it. Xe’s holding a grudge against me.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:07 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
Sigh. Yes I see that. It’s still beyond irritating and while I can’t complain because it’s not MY work load, I still hate the reality of it. I know it wasn’t to antagonize, but I still think it wasn’t the best idea.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:08 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Lying for one?
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 2:08 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG
Since you’re obviously such a superior actual scientist type, why do you feel the need to hang out here and insult people?
Have you never heard the term trophy wife? Or considered the connotations behind the word trophy? Or watched tv?
Do you have anything of substance to contribute to the discussion?
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 2:08 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Zerple:
Are you sure? I mean, I wasn’t even taking part at the time and we all know I’m the trolliest troll around.
Sally:
Choice comment from my sister-in-law about her three year old daughter: “I don’t always want to dress her in pink! It’s the color she picks!” I have seen my niece’s wardrobe and the only other available color is lavender.
She was also given her first purse when she was under a year old. It was pink.
Cameron:
Protip: Saying “no offense” doesn’t remove any of the offense. Douche weasel.
Well, fuck. Some of us crazy feminists actually care about video games. Some of us crazy feminists actually care about what kind of societal pressures that young women face. But, obviously it’s not important enough to discuss ‘cos you deem it unimportant, huh?
Here’s the rub: If a dude plays CoD and IRL isn’t a violent or physically aggressive person, no one gives a shit. If a girl isn’t interested in shopping or fashion or having a man take care of her OMG, there’s something wrong with her! (Or even worse, she could grow up to be a *gasp!* dyke!)
Here’s how I see the OP: this kind of shit* is a symptom of a truly fucked up society– a society which is actually getting worse when it comes to equality.
*Marketing “boy” games and “girl” games is a problem unto itself, but I’mma leave it alone right now.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:09 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Well, that’s silly. Data from advertising is still data. And viewing it through a feminist lens shouldn’t be a deal-breaker unless you’re an anti-feminist, which isn’t a rationally defensible position (assuming default stance of humanist values).
Also, citation please about the “real scientists.” Shall we come up with a list of the scientists who’ve cited the articles I linked to above, and determine whether or not they are “real” scientists? Or are they disqualified by the simple act of citing feminist articles? Have we surveyed all “real scientists” to determine their attitude about social science done using advertising data, through a feminist lens?
Honestly. You’re not too bright, are you?
razzlefrog
14 October 2011 at 2:11 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Thanks, PZ. I’m a woman and I appreciate your metaphorical stern look to people inadvertently perpetuating sexism.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 2:12 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Actually, I’m a process chemist. I do use HPLC in my work, but only one of the many hats in my job description. One of my processes is being validated for commercialization at the moment. Not a trivial task. And it is worth quite a bit of money to the place I work for.
razzlefrog
14 October 2011 at 2:12 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
(And maybe literal in real life, who knows.)
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:12 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Oh, PaulG is MonkeyGenes? Oh, geez. Nevermind then.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:13 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I skimmed the Purple Moon article (Good contribution IM) and liked what it said about making games theatrical/narrative ((My SO likes to at times watch me game because my selections are apparently amusing/theatrical enough that they like to follow the plot…incidentally they love Lilly and Veronica from New Vegas)
It’s a big part of making games a form of art. Frankly so much has changed since growing up for me it’s not a bit of a mind fuck to remember back before the concepts of narrative immersion and player driven story were in gaming. My first RPG was Mario RPG and I instantly fell in love with the idea of a game being used to tell a story.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:13 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I wouldn’t care if my niece were picking the clothes out herself. But she’s only 6 months old.
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 2:14 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sally 42:
My emphasis (bold text). Thanks for admitting that there is no scientific research concerning Caine’s original assertion.
ibyea 341:
Firstly, English is not your primary language, so you have that in your favor.
Secondly, I am a very successful scientist.
Thirdly, while a Nobel prize may not be foremost in our minds, if a scientist believes that they will never get to that level then they are in the wrong job.
Fourthly, Nerd is a self-declared HPLC operator. He constantly whinges on here about unscientific people, while having little understanding of real science himself.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:16 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Really? That’s so stupid I think it gave me cancer.
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 2:16 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sally:
Well, yeah. But it’s not as though my niece has a choice, either. Virtually everything she owns is pink!
I’d love to know what color she’d choose for herself, but at this point she’d prolly just pick pink ‘cos it’s familiar, you know?
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:16 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Eh, I got my articles mixed up. The last one I meant to quote was this one:
Playing hard to get: metaphor and representation in the discourse of car advertisements
In this article I analyse some of the main semantic and metaphoric representations which underpin the discourse of car advertising in Britain. In particular, I focus on the use of male and female bodies as organizing metaphors which produce a gendered framework for advertising different types of cars. The discussion is based on adverts seen on roadside hoardings in the London area, in magazines, and on television at different periods over the past three years, and I use an analytic framework which is grounded in critical linguistic approaches to texts, situated within the context of current debates in feminist stylistics and critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1989, 1992; Mills, 1995; Stubbs, 1997; Toolan, 1997).
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:17 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Insipidity. Slagging. If I’m on the parole board I vote for “parole violated”
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:18 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PaulG/Monkey Genes/Pollution/JazzHands:
You weren’t unbanned, fuckwit. There was an en masse parole because re-setting up the dungeon was one more thing in a multitude that PZ didn’t have to deal with during the move.
It’s not as though he considered you assholes to be redeemed or anything. As for you whining about what you’ve done? How about when you showed up here as PaulG and pretended to be a newbie so you could be a complete douchebag and asshole to people then exclaim “I’m new! I didn’t know!”? That alone should dump your ass, however, you’ve continued to troll and attempt to work on the grudges you’re holding.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:18 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
Wait…so K.I.T. was a chick?
Is there Knightrider cargo shipping fiction?
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 2:18 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
jose:
Ha! I’d just end up romancing Garrus again.
Mmmmm, alien sex…
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 2:18 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Tethys 347:
My bold emphasis.
So now a figure of speech and TV shows/adverts are considered science?
Seriously, the clientele here have gone downhill fast.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 2:20 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
Then shut the fuck up about how superior of a scientist you are and go away.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:21 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
You’ve unlocked Achievement “TROLL: THE SOLOMON” 120 Xbox pts added!
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:22 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
No, that’s not true. There are no surveys concerning Caine’s original assertion. There is, however, research supporting her position. Is there any research, survey or otherwise, supporting your hypothesis, whatever it is?
What is your hypothesis, anyway? That only a minority of men view women as objects similar to cars?
How do you explain this, then? That is, how do you explain the prevalence of media using women and cars interchangeably as objects of male desire?
It’s just a tiny, but very wealthy minority of men who view women this way?
What’s your theory?
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 2:22 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Nerd
Congrats about your process being validated!
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:22 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Monkey Jizz is the intellectual red ring of death
adafuns =^.^=
14 October 2011 at 2:24 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Maybe its because I’m new here so I don’t understand things fully, but why is everyone feeding the troll?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:24 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing:
To tell you the truth, I’d be afraid to search.
PaulG – also, you have already been warned once by PZ, here at FTB, in your current incarnation of PaulG. You might want to remember that.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:25 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Adafuns
a) it’s cathartic to be a right bastard to assholes
b) It keeps them talking so they show more of how much of an asshole they are so any question of assholery is in doubt
c) It keeps them talking so they get themselves banned
d) Sometimes it helps
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:26 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
adafuns:
It’s how we keep our coats healthy and our fangs sniny.
Pteryxx
14 October 2011 at 2:26 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Heck, even if PaulG’s some real scientist or other, obviously ‘e fails at sociology.
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 2:27 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
adafuns:
Shits and giggles.
adafuns =^.^=
14 October 2011 at 2:28 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Cain
I see.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:28 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PaulG
Well he must be good! He thinks he might near a Nobel!
*snicker*
Man sure would be great if all those asshole not-real scientists in the FDA and CDC and all smartened up and quit their jobs. No need for people to do research on mosquito pesticide resistance or toxicity tests or any of the useless research like that! If they cleared out it’d give more room for the big dogs to run…fo shizzle!
PaulG
14 October 2011 at 2:29 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Sally 367:
I don’t have one. If you’d read and understood, you would see that all I wanted was for Caine to substantiate her hypothesis. That hasn’t happened; instead, she and others have turned to their usual tactic of demolishing the person, not the argument.
Pitiful.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:29 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Anyone who gets car or motorcycle magazines (and we get about a metric fucktonne of them) is well aware of the amount of near naked women draped over, seated on or sexily posing next to the cars and motorcycles.
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 2:29 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
The discussion is on how girls are subjected to sexism through the medium of pop culture.
Do try to keep up.
ps Looking forward to you being redungeoned.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:31 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Caine
My mind immediately jumped to a Futurama version with a near naked motorcycle draped over seated on or sexily posing next to a woman
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:33 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
We operate under the “feed them until they explode” model of troll control around here.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 2:34 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Actually, it was Slanted Science who made a big deal about me using a HPLC. PZ?
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:36 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing:
That I’d like to see. :D It’s unfortunate, but there are so few women involved in vintage car restoration that there’s little chance that association will change, at least for now. There are a lot of women motorcycle owners/riders, but there are some seriously bad associations with that one.
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 2:37 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yes, quite. Sorry I was imprecise. Indeed, Caine made the assertion. You made no assertion. Now, however, I am asking you a question. Caine’s assertion was really meant to explain the phenomenon of sexy women constantly being visually associated cars, particularly sports cars.
So do you offer no explanation for the phenomenon of cars marketed using sexy women in bikinis draped over them?
Or do are you maintaining that this phenomenon is a delusion on our parts?
Just for clarity.
Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel
14 October 2011 at 2:38 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
In addition to my 375:
I’m not engaging that piece of shit PaulG troll because sitting on the couch and ripping farts is more intellectually stimulating than having a discussion with him.
And with that, it’s off to bed with me. Have fun, all!
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:42 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
:snort: It wasn’t a hypothesis, fuckwit. You ever going to get over your grudge, Monkey Genes?
Pteryxx
14 October 2011 at 2:43 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Also, PZ the blog owner approves of vigorous, rough-and-tumble discussion in these comments. Offense can be a weapon.
Also,
(I do have links for those, if anyone REEEEALLLY needs them.)
~;>
PZ Myers
14 October 2011 at 2:44 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Interesting. That provoked me to go digging in the old archives, and it turns out that it’s true: SlantedScience was using the same IP address as MonkeyGenes aka one lonely sperm aka PaulG aka a lot of other pseudonyms. Now here he is continuing his same old trolling ways.
I’ve had enough. He’s done. Banned.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:46 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
<|:V
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 2:48 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
chortle
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:48 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Aaaaw, and he won’t even get to complain about it. Thanks, PZ.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:51 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ok now HERE’S an actual good example of sexism/gender roles hurting men
As of my en dof a bet tomorrow I need to stick a cuetip laced with hot sauce up my anus
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:53 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 2:54 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
*crockaduck tear*
Gorun Nova
14 October 2011 at 2:54 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
“You have a new boyfriend! Boyfriend Name: ‘Alleyway bum.’ He gives you: No money, one disease a week!”
“What the hell! I thought his name was ‘Kickass entrepreneur’!”
“That’s the way it goes at Club.”
—
… a truly disgusting game, teaching very disgusting lessons.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 2:55 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Numfar, do the dance of joy!
PZ Myers
14 October 2011 at 2:55 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Don’t worry. He’ll be back under a new pseudonym, judging by his past behavior. And I’ll have to ban him again.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:56 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Ing, that’s just stupidity. And too much beer.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 2:57 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@PZ
YES!
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 2:58 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PZ:
Oh, I know. I can hardly wait. Really.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 2:58 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I meant the banning part, not the part where he returns.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 3:00 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Say, was Slanted Science the troll that was obsessed with the space shuttles?
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 3:01 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Yay! An “Angel” reference! Thanks, Ing.
Ing
14 October 2011 at 3:02 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ibyea
No that was Antagonizer. And he was obsessed with ARIDS. He is in exile on an island not unlike Napoleon.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
14 October 2011 at 3:06 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
You might be thinking of the one besotted with the constellation program, the supposed successor to the shuttle. A few pseudonyms, one was “antagonizer”, which was appropriate.
ibyea
14 October 2011 at 3:11 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
@Ing
Oh, that guy. He actually trolled in my blog with one comment in the About section. I didn’t feed him, so it was only a one comment thing.
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 3:19 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Rectal immolation is a matter of honor?
Wow, maybe they write sagas to his stupidity.
Alethea H. Claw
14 October 2011 at 3:24 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Thanks PZ! Good riddance.
@Caine, Ing, my new motorcycle is nearly naked :) Oddly, I’ve started using “she” for the Bonnie, although I never did before with the Kwaka, the Honda or even the Suzis. But now you’ve got me feeling all weird about it. Hmm.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 3:32 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Alethea, long ago, my Suzi’s name was Lola. Now, the rat bike chopper has the name Lola, the Honda is Moya and the Road King is Roger.
Rev. BigDumbChimp
14 October 2011 at 3:34 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Awesome.
Love the 11:33 pm headache. This should prove to be good for sleeping.
that 5:00 am wake up is looming.
Ichthyic
14 October 2011 at 3:42 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
a bit late but..
Since they are genetically identical, the only conclusion that I can come up with is that personality is not based on genes.
so then it literally CAN’T be innate behavior, by definition.
as to “different from birth”, again, I predict an awful lot of recall bias there, combined with subtle, maybe even unconscious, manipulation of each kids behavior.
there is a reason we use monozygotic twin studies to study behavior, after all.
other than that, or the idea that there were indeed subtle variations in developmental exposure, there is nothing else to explain differences in behavior newborn monozygotic twins.
fraternal twins?
no problem.
FossilFishy
14 October 2011 at 3:59 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
My 4 year old daughter’s favorite colour is black. She’s remarkably egalitarian with most of her opinions. If you ask which is her favourite Octonaut for instance, she’ll answer “All of them.” But on the colour thing it’s always black and she’s stuck to that for over a year now. We’ve made sure that she has a range of colours in her closet and let her pick outfits when she can be bothered. She doesn’t usually end up looking like a wee goth though, it’s enough for her if some detail or one piece is black.
I’m really interested to see what happens next year when she starts 3 day a week kinder. Will the princess culture that I see in the other girls her age start to come through? I’ve been priming her to fight it by always making the princess in our games together the one who does the rescuing. We’ll see.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 4:14 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
FossilFishy, every girl should have the basic black dress, ya know. ;p
Alethea H. Claw
14 October 2011 at 4:17 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
My partner is one of identical twins. While the social pressures to “be alike” can be quite strong, you also can get family histories in which they are labelled as “the smart one” and “the sociable one” – and this is reinforced, so that tiny differences are magnified as they grow up. (FWIW I think my bloke is both smart AND sociable, and his twin is neither, but I’m probably biased.)
The claims about how small a thing this specific instance of sexism is – and so petty, not worth discussing, get over it – reminded me of a bell hooks essay. Are people here familiar with her birdcage metaphor? If you look very closely at just one wire in the cage, you cannot see the other wires. And it’s such a tiny thin wire, you could easily walk or fly around it. What are you making such a fuss about?
Tethys
14 October 2011 at 4:18 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I know, that’s why I’m using them as an example.
Behavior is both innate and learned. Personality is innate. Babies are born complete with personalities.
Identical twins are not born with identical personalities so there must be additional factors to take into consideration.
Caine, Fleur du Mal
14 October 2011 at 4:28 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Alethea:
I wasn’t. Thank you, it’s an excellent one.
FossilFishy
14 October 2011 at 4:43 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Caine: Oh I know. I’ve never seen a woman who didn’t look good in a properly fitted, simple black dress regardless of age, body shape, skin tone or hair colour. That’s the power of a truly neutral colour methinks.
Alethea: Thanks for that, that birdcage metaphor is brilliant, going to go look up the original essay. Also, the notion of personality traits coming in part from feedback loops driven by confirmation bias is really interesting. I can see such a mechanism being the driver behind all sorts of behaviours, both good and bad. It could be another argument as to why starting with a base assumption that all people are tainted at birth (Original sin) is such a bad idea.
Ichthyic
14 October 2011 at 4:58 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Behavior is both innate and learned. Personality is innate. Babies are born complete with personalities.
sorry, but this makes no sense to me.
personalities are just combinations of behaviors.
Dr. R
14 October 2011 at 5:00 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
As a physician-scientist (MD/PhD) I think I’m qualified to make some educated comments with regards to the statement about male mortality in Western nations. Stress, diet and behavioral factors are major contributors to the lifespan discrepancy. Consider the higher level of risky behavior seen in young males (and even some older ones), the higher rates of heart disease, certain cancers, etc. As mentioned above though, women are catching up (unfortunately) to men in many of these areas. In fact, last year, more women were killed by heart disease than by breast cancer (in fact, breast cancer fatalities are quite uncommon nowadays) Stress is less of a factor, given the relative paucity of male-exclusive or preponderant stressors in modern life. The assertion that men “do the dangerous jobs” is true to an extent. That is, women are grossly underrepresented in occupations with high on-the-job injury and fatality levels, the examples given above are, to a great extent, the exception rather than the rule. Women are catching up though. (See the most recent OSHA occupational hazard statistics for more information) Is the life expectancy discrepancy an issue of concern for society? Yes. Does is nullify common decencyist (my collective term for humanism, humanitarianism, feminism, civil rights activism, etc.) arguments? No. (By the way, a similar life expectancy gap is seen for African-American males and Caucasian males, though not for African-American females, and Caucasian females.)
Sally Strange, OM
14 October 2011 at 5:07 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Tethys,
You’re talking about twins when they are born. But they’ve had 9 months (well, less, I suppose, but still) of interacting with each other and with their environment (their mother). So their genetics are identical, but their experiences in the womb are not. So you can’t necessarily point to genetics as 100% of the explanation for perceived differences in their personalities, even right after birth. Heck, just the difference between being born first and second has got to make an imprint on a baby’s personality.
kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~
14 October 2011 at 5:09 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
blockquote>as to “different from birth”, again, I predict an awful lot of recall bias there, combined with subtle, maybe even unconscious, manipulation of each kids behavior.
A baby boy is born. He screams and the people around him smile and say “He’s all boy”.
A baby girl is born. She screams and the people around her wait till she’s quiet and then say “She’s so beautiful”.
kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~
14 October 2011 at 5:10 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
dammit.
kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~
14 October 2011 at 5:11 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
FUCKIT
Pteryxx
14 October 2011 at 5:24 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
Posts like this make it all worthwhile. ♥