[Split] Sexism

This forum is the place to have more serious discussions about politics and religion, and your opinions thereof. Be courteous!

Moderator:Forum Administrators

Forum rules
When a registered user insults another person (user or not), nation, political group or religious group, s/he will be deprived of her/his permission to post in the forum. That user has the right to re-register one week after s/he has lost the permission. Further violations will result in longer prohibitions.

By default, you are automatically registered to post in this forum. However, users cannot post in the politics forum during the first week after registration. Users can also not make their very first post in the politics forum.
User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts:10890
Joined:2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender:male
Location:Toronto
Country:CACanada (Canada)
Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby mōdgethanc » 2014-08-27, 20:06

Varislintu wrote:Yeah, this is a big problem in Finland as well, but not necessarily in broken up marriages, but existing ones. Man (most often it's the man) is in debt or has some other issues, decides to solve it by killing wife, children and himself. Perhesurma, we call it; family homicide.
It's called familicide in criminology. There are a whole bunch of Latinate terms for murder, in fact: patricide, matricide, fratricide, uxoricide, etc.
[ˈmoːdjeðɑŋk]

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2014-08-28, 10:21

mōdgethanc wrote:Latinate terms for murder, in fact: patricide, matricide, fratricide, uxoricide, etc.


Never encountered the term uxoricide; I'm assuming it's not very widely used. Which is strange, actually, since one would think wife murder is kind of a commonly occurring phenomenon.

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts:25540
Joined:2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name:Da
Location:Chicago
Country:USUnited States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-08-28, 14:10

Varislintu wrote:
mōdgethanc wrote:Latinate terms for murder, in fact: patricide, matricide, fratricide, uxoricide, etc.

Never encountered the term uxoricide; I'm assuming it's not very widely used. Which is strange, actually, since one would think wife murder is kind of a commonly occurring phenomenon.

And I've never heard "familicide" before even though, as I mentioned, these occur almost daily in the USA. Honestly, I think when people hear "murder-suicide", they just assume a romantic partner was the victim unless told otherwise.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
md0
Posts:8188
Joined:2010-08-08, 19:56
Country:DEGermany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby md0 » 2014-08-28, 16:36

So, the woman died early today. Or as the newspapers put it, "she submitted to her injuries".
People on my FB news stream are very critical of the language used in reporting this and all similar cases.

Some of the points they make (and keep in mind that I have to use literal translation from Greek)

Newspapers always say "She received shots" in impersonal passive voice (never "She was shot [by...]" or in the active voice "He shot her")

Similarly, "she submitted to her injuries", not "she was killed/murdered".

Calling it a "family tragedy" only when the murderer commits suicide, but never before that final bullet is shot. Or if there's no marriage, then it's "a crime of passion" (12 months ago, when a stalker shot and killed a woman who wouldn't go on a date with him right when she stepped after her flat, that was "a crime of passion" and not a cold-blood murder as you'd think)

How the newspapers overemphasise that the man was facing issues (prior convictions in this case) in a sympathetic tone, not questioning why an ex-convict legally owned a rifle (which he carried around in his car when he went to pick up the children no less! That's premeditation). And if I may add, from the child's perspective again, that the reporters doesn't feel any need to acknowledge the legitimacy of the children's refusal of going away with such a person.

And today, that the newspapers "Paternal grandfather's appeal: Donate to a fund to support the orphaned children instead of bringing flowers to the funeral [of the mother]". What the headline obscures is that this is a joint demand of all three families: paternal grandparents, maternal grandparents, and the deceased woman's partner's family.

So, their point in general is that reporting of, let's call them familicides, is presented in a way that exonerates the aggressor just because they took their own life as well. Reporters never ask why was an ex-convict allowed to legally own a rifle, why would they carry a gun when picking up their children, why were the children forced to keep contact with a person they didn't desire to, and reporters never use direct language instead presenting it as if the bullets materialised out of nowhere in the case of the murder and attempted murder (but not in the case of the suicide, where they directly say "X shot themself").
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)
Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)Elementary Finnish (fi)Netherlands Dutch (nl)

User avatar
Car
Forum Administrator
Posts:10953
Joined:2002-06-21, 19:24
Real Name:Silvia
Gender:female
Country:DEGermany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Car » 2014-08-28, 18:49

Varislintu wrote:Yeah, this is a big problem in Finland as well, but not necessarily in broken up marriages, but existing ones. Man (most often it's the man) is in debt or has some other issues, decides to solve it by killing wife, children and himself. Perhesurma, we call it; family homicide.

That's true for Germany as well, it's mostly called Familiendrama ("family drama"), also Familientragödie ("family tragedy"), Quite euphemistic terms, if you ask me.

The last case happened just two days ago.
Please correct my mistakes!

User avatar
loqu
Posts:11891
Joined:2007-08-15, 21:12
Real Name:Daniel
Gender:male
Location:Barcelona, Catalonia

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby loqu » 2014-08-28, 19:05

They were depicted on the media as crimes of passion here as well in the 80's. Fortunately we've evolved. But I don't like the most widespread term either, violencia de género. First of all, it is a bad translation of gender violence (if that even exists in English), since género in Spanish only means gender in the case of words, but not on people. And secondly, it is used wrong because agressions on men by women are not to be included on the term. So I prefer violencia machista.
Нека људи уживају у стварима.
Let people enjoy things.

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts:10890
Joined:2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender:male
Location:Toronto
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby mōdgethanc » 2014-08-28, 20:14

loqu wrote:But I don't like the most widespread term either, violencia de género. First of all, it is a bad translation of gender violence (if that even exists in English)
Yes it does, and it's quite common (you may see "gender-based violence" as well) but "domestic violence" is more common although strictly speaking it refers to violence within the home.
And secondly, it is used wrong because aggressions on men by women are not to be included on the term. So I prefer violencia machista.
What do you call violence when a woman is the aggressor, then?
[ˈmoːdjeðɑŋk]

User avatar
loqu
Posts:11891
Joined:2007-08-15, 21:12
Real Name:Daniel
Gender:male
Location:Barcelona, Catalonia

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby loqu » 2014-08-29, 16:13

I think it's not common enough to get a trendy name of its own. It's just violence.

When it actually happens it isn't taken seriously so it doesn't even make it to the media. Yay for chauvinism and all that strong-gender-bullshit.
Нека људи уживају у стварима.
Let people enjoy things.

User avatar
Babelfish
Posts:4444
Joined:2005-07-21, 12:00
Gender:male
Location:רחובות
Country:ILIsrael (ישראל / إسرائيل)
Contact:

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Babelfish » 2014-08-30, 21:12

Seems to be the same cr@p everywhere :( Happens here too. I don't think there's much sympathy here in the news to the suicide-murderer, though, but there is some tendency to belittle the entire thing - it's generally called murder "on romantic backgrounds", which is already causing an outrage. WTF makes a man feel entitled to murder his own wife and children if she decides to leave him, is completely beyond me (I've never heard of a similar case with women).
Native languages: Hebrew (he) & English (en)
My language pages: http://babelfish.50webs.com/

מן המקום בו אנו צודקים לא יפרחו לעולם פרחים באביב (יהודה עמיחי)
From the place where we are in the right, flowers will never grow in the spring (Yhuda Amihay)

User avatar
md0
Posts:8188
Joined:2010-08-08, 19:56
Country:DEGermany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby md0 » 2014-09-09, 18:18

I don't think I can even say anything

http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/09/0 ... e-irc-log/
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)
Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)Elementary Finnish (fi)Netherlands Dutch (nl)

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2014-09-09, 19:14

meidei wrote:I don't think I can even say anything

http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/09/0 ... e-irc-log/


I... can imagine it must be bad. I have high respect for Futrelle, but I can't read his blog because I can't handle being exposed to just how much some men hate my kind. I hope Quinn knows there are people who are "on her side", so to say. Who are against what's being done to her.

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts:25540
Joined:2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name:Da
Location:Chicago
Country:USUnited States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-09-12, 14:34

"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
Massimiliano B
Posts:1962
Joined:2009-03-31, 10:01
Real Name:Massimiliano Bavieri
Gender:male
Location:Lucca
Country:ITItaly (Italia)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Massimiliano B » 2015-02-10, 10:18

I find this video very interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2015-02-10, 16:44

Massimiliano B wrote:I find this video very interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70


What did you like or find especially interesting in it?

EDIT: Haha, from the comments (I know, I know, masochism):

"What would be so dangerous if the gender differences were due to biology?"

Shortly below:

"Interesting how these feminists all have short hair. I wonder if they're trying to look like men?"

Yeah, I do wonder what is so potentially dangerous about the position that men and women are always socially different due to biology. Maybe, say, shaming of norm-breakers, accusations of others being gender imposters, accusations of people doing their gender wrong, or attributing more value to one set of gendered behaviour (like cutting one's hair short)? :ohwell:

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2015-02-10, 21:00

I watched some of the documentary, but not nearly all of it.

From how it's edited, I gather that the documentary has the agenda of casting doubt on the idea that how the genders choose professions is largely due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture), and instead wants to lay these gender differences at the door of biological differences of the brain (nature). For that reason I find it rather puzzling that the guy starts the documentary by mentioning a plethora of professions which used to be reserved for men, but are now equally occupied by women. After that intro into the topic, he then continues on to build his case around mostly three professions; nursing (women), engineering (men) and construction (men).

Huh? :P

Why on earth do all the other professions mentioned in the beginning not count as something that used to be considered "men's work"? Why are they not evidence for the effect of "nurture"? Or if they are accepted as evidence for "nurture", then why did a specific kind of nurture apparently make those jobs gendered back in the day, but specifically nursing, construction and engineering are evidence of biological gender differences in the brain? It doesn't make sense, and kind of severly undermines the premise of the entire documentary.

The documentary also portrays in slightly ridiculed light the gender researcher's question of "Why is our society so obsessed with finding biological gender differences of the mental sphere?" However, looking down on this question is kind of silly when the entire documentary is proof of how relevant that question is. The guy had to really narrow down the sphere of gendered jobs in order to make his case that genders "naturally" prefer different jobs. Basically he had to leave out all the jobs where women now are a significant portion. Does he not see what he is doing? :P

Ludwig Whitby
Posts:3664
Joined:2009-03-30, 13:44
Gender:male
Location:Belgrade
Country:RSSerbia (Србија)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Ludwig Whitby » 2015-02-10, 21:40

Varislintu wrote:I watched some of the documentary, but not nearly all of it.

From how it's edited, I gather that the documentary has the agenda of casting doubt on the idea that how the genders choose professions is largely due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture), and instead wants to lay these gender differences at the door of biological differences of the brain (nature).

Quite the opposite. It is supporting the idea that how genders choose professions is largely due to due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture). It is casting doubt on the idea that how genders choose professions is solely due to due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture).

Varislintu wrote:For that reason I find it rather puzzling that the guy starts the documentary by mentioning a plethora of professions which used to be reserved for men, but are now equally occupied by women. After that intro into the topic, he then continues on to build his case around mostly three professions; nursing (women), engineering (men) and construction (men).Why on earth do all the other professions mentioned in the beginning not count as something that used to be considered "men's work"? Why are they not evidence for the effect of "nurture"? Or if they are accepted as evidence for "nurture", then why did a specific kind of nurture apparently make those jobs gendered back in the day, but specifically nursing, construction and engineering are evidence of biological gender differences in the brain? It doesn't make sense, and kind of severly undermines the premise of the entire documentary.

He starts by praising the Norwegian efforts in gender equality and then states that despite the efforts, there are still some professions where the situation has been unchanged. The question was why? Why are there more female engineers in less gender equal countries? If it's all about nurture, I'd expect to see that Norway has the same number of male and female engineers. Where's the catch?


Varislintu wrote:The documentary also portrays in slightly ridiculed light the gender researcher's question of "Why is our society so obsessed with finding biological gender differences of the mental sphere?" However, looking down on this question is kind of silly when the entire documentary is proof of how relevant that question is. The guy had to really narrow down the sphere of gendered jobs in order to make his case that genders "naturally" prefer different jobs. Basically he had to leave out all the jobs where women now are a significant portion. Does he not see what he is doing? :P

I could turn the question around. Why are feminists always dismissing biological gender differences a priori? Even when presented with a case that should at the very least spark some thoughts and questioning of the established theories, they won't consider them?


And finally, my thoughts on the question of the 'Norwegian gender equality paradox': Women in less equal countries have a need to prove themselves to be equal to men, so they choose engineering, one of the toughest and manliest professions, more often than Norwegian girls do. Norwegian girls are secure and already know that they are equal to boys and are quite happy that the society they live in sees them as equal to boys, so they have no such need and are able to choose a profession without the pressure of a socially inflicted inferiority complex. So they simply choose what fits them best.

Or more personally: My mother is an engineer. She became an engineer, because her father (also an engineer) never saw her as smart enough or able enough and had always preferred my uncle. The whole family and their circle of friends expected my uncle to follow in the footsteps of his father, and as for my mother, well, she can't really be a good engineer, now could she? It took my mother many years to realize that she truly isn't interested in engineering and was only compensating.

vijayjohn
Language Forum Moderator
Posts:27056
Joined:2013-01-10, 8:49
Real Name:Vijay John
Gender:male
Location:Austin, Texas, USA
Country:USUnited States (United States)
Contact:

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby vijayjohn » 2015-02-10, 21:48

Is engineering as much in demand, or as popular a field, in Norway as it is in those other countries?

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2015-02-10, 22:16

Ludwig Whitby wrote:Quite the opposite. It is supporting the idea that how genders choose professions is largely due to due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture). It is casting doubt on the idea that how genders choose professions is solely due to due to cultural history and gender socialisation (i.e. nurture).


Alright, if you watched the whole thing, you would know this better than me.

Ludwig Whitby wrote:He starts by praising the Norwegian efforts in gender equality and then states that despite the efforts, there are still some professions where the situation has been unchanged. The question was why? Why are there more female engineers in less gender equal countries? If it's all about nurture, I'd expect to see that Norway has the same number of male and female engineers. Where's the catch?


Why would it be expected? The people in those professions right now are either the very people who grew up in "traditional gender role" era, or their children. Why would Norway be some kind of place where nobody is affected by old gender roles?

I don't know how Finland counts in gender equality, but I know that when I was in school, there was absolutely for example an unwritten rule that girls choose textile crafts and boys choose wood crafts. Not even from teachers, but from us children ourselves. Where did we get that idea? I didn't feel any special fondness towards textile crafts, but I chose that class because I would have needed a ginormous interest in wood crafts to go against the flow and be the only girl in that class.

And I'm only 30. People older than me will probably only have more interesting examples of how they were subtly guided towards interests/skills/professions.

Ludwig Whitby wrote:I could turn the question around. Why are feminists always dismissing biological gender differences a priori? Even when presented with a case that should at the very least spark some thoughts and questioning of the established theories, they won't consider them?


Because that assumption leads nowhere. It leads to no self-examination, rethinking or change in how we treat girls and boys. Sure, it could be that there are immutable biological brain differences. Just like it could be that God created the world and just made it look like evolution happened. But what is the point of thinking like that? Settling on that and never asking "but what if?"

Ludwig Whitby wrote:And finally, my thoughts on the question of the 'Norwegian gender equality paradox': Women in less equal countries have a need to prove themselves to be equal to men, so they choose engineering, one of the toughest and manliest professions, more often than Norwegian girls do. Norwegian girls are secure and already know that they are equal to boys and are quite happy that the society they live in sees them as equal to boys, so they have no such need and are able to choose a profession without the pressure of a socially inflicted inferiority complex. So they simply choose what fits them best.


Could be, yes. But are you willing to just leave it at "engineering just doesn't fit women?" If you had a daughter, would you be willing to just trust that she is naturally not fit for engineering, nor engineering to her?

Ludwig Whitby wrote:Or more personally: My mother is an engineer. She became an engineer, because her father (also an engineer) never saw her as smart enough or able enough and had always preferred my uncle. The whole family and their circle of friends expected my uncle to follow in the footsteps of his father, and as for my mother, well, she can't really be a good engineer, now could she? It took my mother many years to realize that she truly isn't interested in engineering and was only compensating.


Sure, sexism or family unfairnesses shouldn't drive people to professions they don't like. But after this anecdote I would feel for all the women engineers (and soldiers, and construction-related workers, etc) who are actually really interested in what they do, but are now possibly seen as gender imposters or overcompensating due to an inferiority complex. And not to mention the younger girls and women who might walk away with the cultural message that these jobs are so inherently male that them pursuing them is weird and desperate and gender-bending. That it's not normal for them to pursue those professions.

I want a world where it's attitudinally normal for women to pursue engineering and for men to pursue nursing. They don't have to end up doing it 50-50%, or at all. As long as it's a valid, normal option. It's these un-normalising attitudes that I would want gone. And the attitudes are going nowhere if we label certain things as naturally women's interests or men's interests and just stop thinking about it after that.

User avatar
Johanna
Language Forum Moderator
Posts:6679
Joined:2006-09-17, 18:05
Real Name:Johanna
Gender:female
Location:Lidköping, Westrogothia
Country:SESweden (Sverige)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Johanna » 2015-02-10, 23:24

I thought it was OK, the two British scientists say pretty balanced things, one that there's a huge overlap in interests between men and women, and the other that it's not all about biology it's just that we shouldn't forget about it completely, and it sounds like he means when dealing with human behaviour in general.

And to be honest, I don't like the way the two who said it's all culture handled it at all, they didn't seem to go about it in a very scientific way at all, instead they seemed to have decided beforehand that there's no biology at all involved, despite none of them actually being a biologist, instead coming from the field of social sciences.

On the other hand, there were six people interviewed, and you can do a lot by choosing who to talk with and who not to. Also, like Varislintu says, the main problem isn't that there may be a general difference between the group 'men' and the group 'women', it's when things that one group prefer becomes inaccessible to the other group to a large degree we've got a problem, but this video will probably be used by anti-feminists to justify just that.

On a side note, it was really frustrating listening to what's basically my native language while having English subtitles in my face :P
Swedish (sv) native; English (en) good; Norwegian (no) read fluently, understand well, speak badly; Danish (dk) read fluently, understand badly, can't speak; Faroese (fo) read some, understand a bit, speak a few sentences; German (de) French (fr) Spanish (es) forgetting; heritage language.

User avatar
Massimiliano B
Posts:1962
Joined:2009-03-31, 10:01
Real Name:Massimiliano Bavieri
Gender:male
Location:Lucca
Country:ITItaly (Italia)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Massimiliano B » 2015-02-11, 0:34

The point of that video is the following: if gender roles are culturally determined, why the highly anti-sexist culture of Norway does not produce the same amount of male and female workers for a determined job? This is the paradox.

Apart from that, there is an even greater paradox in the anti-sexism: there is the illusion of being able to reach a fundamental level of reality about the nature of the human being, which is believed to lie beyond the interpretations and mediations constituted by the "ideal" world. There is the unawareness of the fact that in order to eliminate the differences between men and women I have to indoctrinate - that is, I have to use culture, education, manipulation - that previously I had declared to fight. Otherwise, I had to admit that I've found the ultimate truth about man's nature.


Return to “Politics and Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests