Is feminism still needed in the U.S.

[ignition]

Straw men, red herrings and falsehoods, OH MY!

Let's try this again.

You claimed that it is IMPOSSIBLE for women to attain equal political representation without central planning that forces people to vote for women. Your claim, not mine.

I demonstrated that it is not only possible, but actually happening in various parts of the world.

You can either retract your absurd claim or stand by it, but you can't pretend your claim came from me. That's just plain dishonest.

Ok fine, if you want to play it that way. I tried to explain nicely exactly what I meant but it seems that you are just not interested so let me put it another way:

What part of applying the idea to certain countries do you find difficult to understand? Can you read English? Read my post pertaining to what you are saying and ask yourself why you aren't able to compute basic ideas.

 

[Me Myself]

men don't negotiate more, that is the point. Only when accepting a job.

Specialized fields and science related fields have a huge lack of women despite showing higher aptitude for sciences and math up until middle school. Girls who do show high aptitude often shy away from sciences for more traditional accepted feminine fields of study.

The sexual harassment paranoia is often from exaggerated stories, mens lack of awareness as to what constitutes sexual harassment and rampant sexual harassment in certain work environments.

Have a response to the rest, but I have to go pick up friends kids. Take care, thanks for the discussion- everyone.

Thanks for the discussion

 

[dust1n]

Totally. I can't wait.

First order of business - I want Curious George to repost some of those videos. Maybe one at a time, to give them the focused, intelligent attention and discussion they each deserve.

Where were you thinking it should be... under the Political World? There isn't really a great section for it to go.

 

[ignition]

So you already know that feminists still have some major work to do in Islamic countries? Then we agree! Woohoo!

Yes; that's exactly what I said. There's a lot of work to do, but from your post it sounded like there's genital mutilations on every street corner, women being beaten left, right and centre. It just doesn't work like that in the Middle East. Most people are normal and don't resort to such draconian actions.

 

[Me Myself]

Where were you thinking it should be... under the Political World? There isn't really a great section for it to go.

I would say humanism if it wasnt for it being under atheist stuff.

 

[Alceste]

I may be wrong but I assume he says a literal fifty fifty is highly improbable unless putting there a legal discrimination of sexes for which it is necessary to have a exact amount of people of some sex.

I never said exact. I said "roughly equal", which is EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS whenever and wherever obstacles for women's political participation are destroyed.

Right now in Afghanistan there are women risking their lives daily to blaze a trail for future female Afghan politicians. They know they will probably be assassinated for their trouble, and they are doing it anyway, to help remove those obstacles for their daughters and grand-daughters. Today it's only a handful, but in a generation or two it may be roughly equal. We know this because that is what happens everywhere. That's what happened here. (Without the death threats, perhaps, but still - first there were none, then there were a few, then, then very quickly there were a roughly equal number).

 

[Alceste]

Where were you thinking it should be... under the Political World? There isn't really a great section for it to go.

Non-religious beliefs. (Secularism, humanism, agnosticism, atheism, etc).

 

[Me Myself]

I never said exact. I said "roughly equal", which is EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS whenever and wherever obstacles for women's political participation are destroyed.

Right now in Afghanistan there are women risking their lives daily to blaze a trail for future female Afghan politicians. They know they will probably be assassinated for their trouble, and they are doing it anyway, to help remove those obstacles for their daughters and grand-daughters. Today it's only a handful, but in a generation or two it may be roughly equal. We know this because that is what happens everywhere. That's what happened here. (Without the death threats, perhaps, but still - first there were none, then there were a few, then, then very quickly there were a roughly equal number).

Which obstacles would you say women in US face for trying to run for congress and other political charges?

 

[Alceste]

Yes; that's exactly what I said. There's a lot of work to do, but from your post it sounded like there's genital mutilations on every street corner, women being beaten left, right and centre. It just doesn't work like that in the Middle East. Most people are normal and don't resort to such draconian actions.

Quote me please so i can get a sense of what comment you are referring to.

 

[dust1n]

Non-religious beliefs. (Secularism, humanism, agnosticism, atheism, etc).

Oh, duh. That makes sense.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I apologize if this has already been brought up and answered in this thread (because, to be honest, I didn't go through all the 41 pages of this thread before posting), but if "feminism" shouldn't be used as a term because it supposedly indicates bias toward females, then wouldn't the same logic apply to each and every political movement in history that has adopted a name suggesting advocacy for a specific group's rights? Would it have been wrong for a group defending black people's rights decades ago to adopt a name that contained the word "black" in it, for instance?

 

[Alceste]

Which obstacles would you say women in US face for trying to run for congress and other political charges?

Why? You're in Ecuador and I'm in Canada. Why should we zero in on the US? Does it make a difference to either of us?

In this country, we don't face many political obstacles any more, which is evidenced by the fact that we have achieved roughly equal political representation (although there is still a little way to go). There are still some issues with totally normal speeches and comments from female politicians being described as emotional or hysterical in the media from time to time, but that's kind of a minor quibble.

At home, I would focus on specific careers where women are inadequately represented, like engineering, IT and the sciences. I would address the issue through education and (in this case) branding. There have been ads to brand science as a "girl thing". They kind of suck, but they're pretty effective in changing attitudes. The radio station I listen to has a science program where their guests are roughly equally male and female scientists. It's all good. If women aren't pursuing specific fields, it's often out of a sense that it's not realistic. They pick up that impression from the media's representation of people in those jobs - it used to be mostly men when I was growing up. If we can show that it is indeed a realistic career goal for a woman to be a programmer, scientist, engineer, etc, women with inclinations toward those careers will just go ahead and pursue them.

 

[ignition]

I may be wrong but I assume he says a literal fifty fifty is highly improbable unless putting there a legal discrimination of sexes for which it is necessary to have a exact amount of people of some sex.

That's what I meant yes, and I was referring mainly to areas that currently do not have equal representation. To beg for 50-50 is unrealistic and maybe even counter-productive. 90-10 is a real concern. But between those two ratios I don't really see the issue, there's certainly nothing to be worried about if it's 60-40 or 70-30. Targeting 50-50 solves nothing.

 

[Alceste]

I apologize if this has already been brought up and answered in this thread (because, to be honest, I didn't go through all the 41 pages of this thread before posting), but if "feminism" shouldn't be used as a term because it supposedly indicates bias toward females, then wouldn't the same logic apply to each and every political movement in history that has adopted a name suggesting advocacy for a specific group's rights? Would it have been wrong for a group defending black people's rights decades ago to adopt a name that contained the word "black" in it, for instance?

That hasn't been brought up, and it's a good question. A lot of people don't like the word "atheist", for example, and have misconceptions about what it means. Is that any reason to stop using the word? Not as far as I'm concerned. I'll just continue to try to explain what it means, and if it doesn't sink in, it's not my problem.

 

[Me Myself]

Why? You're in Ecuador and I'm in Canada. Why should we zero in on the US? Does it make a difference to either of us?

In this country, we don't face many political obstacles any more, which is evidenced by the fact that we have achieved roughly equal political representation (although there is still a little way to go). At home, I would focus on specific careers where women are inadequately represented, like engineering, IT and the sciences. I would address the issue through education and (in this case) branding. There have been ads to brand science as a "girl thing". They kind of suck, but they're pretty effective in changing attitudes. The radio station I listen to has a science program where their guests are roughly equally male and female scientists. It's all good. If women aren't pursuing specific fields, it's often out of a sense that it's not realistic. They pick up that impression from the media's representation of people in those jobs - it used to be mostly men when I was growing up. If we can show that it is indeed a realistic career goal for a woman to be a programmer, scientist, engineer, etc, women with inclinations toward those careers will just go ahead and pursue them.

Yes and no. I am curious . Also US i think is a great global influence in general so knowing about it is good.

We would agree displaying female characters in a wide variety of jobs in general media is a big advance for supporting equality on a positive manner?

 

[Me Myself]

I apologize if this has already been brought up and answered in this thread (because, to be honest, I didn't go through all the 41 pages of this thread before posting), but if "feminism" shouldn't be used as a term because it supposedly indicates bias toward females, then wouldn't the same logic apply to each and every political movement in history that has adopted a name suggesting advocacy for a specific group's rights? Would it have been wrong for a group defending black people's rights decades ago to adopt a name that contained the word "black" in it, for instance?

I adressed some of it way back, but people feel this thread shouldnt be about the branding of feminism, so I think I am opting out of a reply :ninja:

 

[Alceste]

Yes and no. I am curious . Also US i think is a great global influence in general so knowing about it is good.

We would agree displaying female characters in a wide variety of jobs in general media is a big advance for supporting equality on a positive manner?

Absolutely, I agree with that. I use gender pronouns interchangeably regardless of the job I'm describing.

 

[Alceste]

That's what I meant yes, and I was referring mainly to areas that currently do not have equal representation. To beg for 50-50 is unrealistic and maybe even counter-productive. 90-10 is a real concern. But between those two ratios I don't really see the issue, there's certainly nothing to be worried about if it's 60-40 or 70-30. Targeting 50-50 solves nothing.

How is it unrealistic when various parts of the world have already arrived at a roughly equal ratio?

 

[ignition]

How is it unrealistic when various parts of the world have already arrived at a roughly equal ratio?

Well, various parts of the world are also covered in perpetual sunshine, it doesn't mean it's going to happen here love.

 

[Me Myself]

Well, various parts of the world are also covered in perpetual sunshine, it doesn't mean it's going to happen here love.

Snshine is predictable and so is human behaviour.

Though human behaviour may be a tad more complicated to predict with at level of accuracy.