By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Attitudes 100 years since women's suffrage

Jaicee said:
curl-6 said:

Not being a woman myself, my ability to comment on their wellbeing is limited to what I hear from me female friends, colleagues, and family, and what I observe for myself, which will obviously constitute a mere sliver of the lived experience of being female here.

In my area, (autism advocacy) one big problem faced by women is that females on the spectrum are much less likely to get diagnosed than their male counterparts, or to get diagnosed at a later age, due to the difference in how the condition presents itself in women versus men.

This leads to autistic women having to endure more confusion, psychological distress, and misdiagnosis with other conditions; one of my ex girlfriends was misdiagnosed with bipolar and schizophrenia before they finally worked out in her 20s that she was just autistic.

Due to men being more widely diagnosed than women, my field is also highly male-dominated at present, though thankfully this is starting to change as I am seeing a generation of autistic women my age and younger who are joining the advocacy movement pushing for greater awareness and acceptance of autistic women. It's an exciting and encouraging change to watch.

I've found this to be easily the most interesting reply so far because I actually learned something from it! Don't have much to add to it as someone who isn't on the autism spectrum myself, but just wanted to formally thank you for posting it.

Thank you, you're most welcome.

It's pretty much just the field where I have the most knowledge of women's experience due to it being my area, (both in terms of my occupation and my neurology) and the fact that through both work and friends it's an issue I frequently come into contact with and have received a great deal of education about.

As a result, for a lot of the women I know that's been one aspect of inequality that has significantly affected their lives; for most of them, getting a diagnosis was a moment of great clarity and validation that really helped them to understand and accept themselves, but it was something a lot of them didn't get until they were adults, whereas most males I know on the spectrum were diagnosed in childhood.

This also leads to women lacking access to support services compared to men, which can have a considerable impact on one's quality of life.

Like I say though, there's a wave of positive change currently in progress, spearheaded by some truly amazing autistic women, several of whom I have the privilege of having worked alongside.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 01 September 2020

Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network
Dulfite said:

You said stuff before starting 1. So I'll respond to each thought in order:

1) My original response wasn't written to tick you off, but simply point out how some of the language you used could be interpreted as sexist. That wasn't mean shouting at you, or calling you a sexist for the rest of your life. I was simply pointing out something I thought would be helpful for you to see, another perspective. If you don't want to change your OP language that is fine and your right.

2) I never said women murder babies for the fun of it. Women are extremely stressed before, during, and especially after the procedure. Nothing about it is fun and I never suggested women enjoy it, so please don't slander me.

3) Regarding giggling, that isn't subjective. Babies giggle in the womb, and hiccup, and jump and do all sorts of other fun things. They are figuring out life in there and all the fun little things they can do. And sadly, despite all those wonderful indications that they are human, the needle still comes.

4) Regarding the 42% that are conservative feminists... But what does that mean? My wife is a 1/2nd wave feminist, but not a 3rd wave feminist. She hates abortion as much as I do. So again, what do those 42% even mean? I read a poll recently that indicated men are, by a majority, supportive of abortion. That same poll indicated women, by a majority, aren't supportive of abortion rights. Does that mean the majority of women aren't feminists simply because they don't adhere to 3rd wave ideology? Feminism is an unclear term in today's society as to what it means.

5) I never claimed to have evidence that this site was left leaning. It's just the feel I get when reading and making posts. I could absolutely be wrong here, but it is my opinion nonetheless. And Super Court Justices aren't the best proof of a sites political leaning. The electorate are usually okay with whoever a SC nominee is, as they aren't as politically charged as Congress or Executive members. That hearing was about personal stuff, and hardly about political issues or prior court cases, so people had to make a gut decision about who to believe. One side had no witnesses or evidence. It's innocent until proven guilty here, thankfully.

6) I won't pretend to know anything about waves of feminism in other countries. I speak purely on an American perspective.

Responding to these:

1) Most feminists get called sexists often just because. I have a thick skin about such claims, so no worries! I also have no interest in apologizing for voicing rational concerns.

2 & 3) I've recently discussed my opinions about abortion at some length over on the morality thread and don't really feel up for a tense and exhausting repeat of that same convo here, so I think I'll just leave the abortion topic be.

4) Here you've touched on something I agree is valid: so many American women today consider themselves feminists that the term has become almost meaningless and unhelpful by itself. It's probably more useful to discuss specific ideas at this point than it is to discuss feminism conceptually in the abstract.

That said, to at least try and clarify the complexities of the various feminist waves a bit if I can, let me here momentarily focus on the contours of the second feminist wave, which we might consider essentially the politics of '70s era women's activists or Baby Boomer feminism if you will. That wasn't/isn't just one thing, one school of thought. It might in fact be most accurate to think of that era's feminists as being composed of two largely separate and distinct movements: the liberal feminists on the one hand, who were mostly older, wealthier, and mainly concerned with advancing the interests of women in the legal arena, especially, though not exclusively, as it pertained to providing women with more economic opportunities...and the radical feminists on the other hand, who were mostly younger, more middle class, and mainly concerned with the culture (questions like rape, marriage and family, religion, lesbians, abortion, beauty culture, sexual objectification, that sort of thing) because their aim was to create a revolutionary climate rather than to simply try and reform the existing institutions of society. Within both of these concurrent movements there emerged a multitude of different little schools of thought too. There was no one thing that "liberal feminism" was per se and no one thing that "radical feminism" was either. Anyway, with respect to these two general movements, your wife sounds to me like someone who would fall into the first overall category (which would indeed represent a conservative viewpoint by today's standards; like these women were generally against abortion, against lesbians, against divorce, etc. etc.) while I'm more the latter type.

On a different tip, what's called third wave feminism, which we might essentially think of as '90s era, or Generation X feminism, is more the variety I personally grew up seeing because I grew up in the '90s. I've learned enough at this point to recognize that there was a general difference of ideals and tone. Where the second feminist wave generally featured a kind of collectivistic ethos, the kind of feminists I met in the 1990s were a highly individualistic bunch. There was almost a kind of demoralized, quasi-defeatist, non-idealistic vibe to it, much like there was to the larger youth culture of that era, as anyone who grew up back then can likely attest to. My early experience with the movement specifically was around a scene known as riot grrrl, which was a feminist underground punk scene that revolved around making and/or distributing stuff anarchist-type zines and music. My original discovery of this scene stemmed from news reports about the original Dyke March in 1993, which was my first exposure to the concept of lesbianism...and hence the first time I learned of words to describe myself. Anyway, getting back to riot grrrl, it's hard to capture what it was about because I don't think we really knew ourselves. Part of us wanted to be feminist revolutionaries, but part of us were realists and extremely skeptical about the prospects of our petty efforts yielding results, so we didn't take ourselves that seriously. Anyway, riot grrrl was just one component-part of a MUCH larger thing that was going on in society in the '90s (especially the early '90s), but it's the part I latched onto at the time. I became more disenchanted with the concept of feminism for a while after like the Spice Girls and Sex and the City took over the world in the late '90s because to me the movement had been about authenticity, being able to be myself, more than anything else and this stuff just smacked of cosmopolitan, consumerist glamorism that turned me off. I came back around in a different form much later on thanks to the internet enabling me to discover spaces like Feminist Current and "crazy" movements like Femen.

I may try and discuss my thoughts (which are mostly criticisms and objections) on the current fourth feminist wave in this country, i.e. essentially Millennial feminism, a bit later but I'm tired and want to go to bed right now.

5 & 6) I might address later. I'm exhausted right now and need to go to bed. Sorry!

Last edited by Jaicee - on 01 September 2020

So I never did answer my own query from the OP, did I? Well, to do so, I think there's a lot of room for improvement here in this country and that that's especially clear when you think about the consequences of this pandemic. It's mostly women who have lost their jobs, and many of those who weren't laid off have had to "voluntarily" quit their jobs or scale back hours to stay home and take care of the kids since schools have been closed and there's been little to no child care available. Theoretically, fathers could quit their jobs instead to provide for these needs, but...fathers tend to make the most money, so it makes more financial sense for the family most often for the mom to make the sacrifices. The result? We're seeing an absolute explosion of exhaustion, anxiety, depression, and other mental illnesses among women that have taken root among men to only a fraction the extent. Also, women were often trapped with abusive partners during the lockdown period, so wife-beating, rape, domestic violence in general skyrocketed. And good luck safely giving birth in the middle of a pandemic! Or terminating a pregnancy as a result when "elective surgeries" have been banned due to covid!

And that's all just been this year! On a more fundamental level, I could talk a lot about how we badly need free child care in this country, about our need of addressing the sexual objectification of female bodies in our culture if we don't want to keep hearing "Me Too" stories all the time indefinitely, about how serious the implications of our collective decision to redefine womanhood as simply a state of mind rather than a material reality could become in the next decade or two if we keep going down this road, about how socially obligatory beauty regimens aren't just expensive and time-consuming, but can severely restrict a woman's lifestyle options, and many, many other things too numerous to list here down to things like why women are still expected to forfeit their family names upon marriage despite how supposedly equitable the institution has become here in the Western world, but it would take far too much time and effort really. The bottom line is that while the U.S. isn't exactly Saudi Arabia, it's also not exactly Iceland either, and even Iceland has real room for improvement.

Last edited by Jaicee - on 03 September 2020

Interesting note, although only partly on the topic of this thread (I don't think this article is enough to justify it's own thread, but it's data provides a little light on current developments in politics in the US regarding congresswomen):
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-women-than-ever-are-running-for-office-but-are-they-winning-their-primaries/
This is a data-based article that shows, that the number of women who won their primaries for seats in congress has improved this year, even over 2018 which saw a record number of congresswomen. This time around not only female democratic candidates improved, but also on the republican side more female candidates won, although it still is far behind democrats (47% of democratic candidates are women now, but only 22% of republican candidates).

The article goes on to explain, that data also shows that the support of Emily's list is helpful here, and that the republican side the new organisations E-PAC and Winning for Women may have influenced that result as well.

So, this is not saying everything is fine now, but that we see in one area - political representation - signs of improvement and how specialized endorsing organizations have helped here.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year], [1], [2], [3], [4]

With respect to these kinds of discussions, I often find that there are two kinds of "problems" (in quotes, because I don't agree that both are truly problematic):

Problem Type 1 is where women are discriminated against, by law, such that they cannot do something. For instance, imagine a law that says that "women cannot hop on one foot."

Problem Type 2 is where women choose, or do not choose, to do something. For instance, imagine that women are allowed to hop on one foot... and then we find that they do not do it, regardless.

I am all for addressing and resolving Problem Type 1, but I do not believe that Problem Type 2 is actually a problem.

I do not know to what extent perceived sexual differences are based in biology or are "socially constructed" as gender, etc., and I've seen enough argument over the years to conclude that this is not yet settled science. Regardless, we all face social pressure to do things or not to do things, to be certain ways, avoid others, and it is the role of an individual to assess such things and plot their own course, accordingly. So long as women are free to pursue whatsoever they'd like, live howsoever they'd like -- as they absolutely should be -- then I don't think we are further qualified to determine what they ought to pursue or how they ought to live, or what choices are good or bad for them to make. The only person so empowered in every case, in every unique situation, is the individual woman herself, who needs to live with the results.



Around the Network

There is always room for progress. But in the West women have by far the most freedom to be who they want to be. They are still very much second class citizens in other regions of the world, regulated to mass child bearing and little else.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Mnementh said:
Interesting note, although only partly on the topic of this thread (I don't think this article is enough to justify it's own thread, but it's data provides a little light on current developments in politics in the US regarding congresswomen):
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-women-than-ever-are-running-for-office-but-are-they-winning-their-primaries/
This is a data-based article that shows, that the number of women who won their primaries for seats in congress has improved this year, even over 2018 which saw a record number of congresswomen. This time around not only female democratic candidates improved, but also on the republican side more female candidates won, although it still is far behind democrats (47% of democratic candidates are women now, but only 22% of republican candidates).

The article goes on to explain, that data also shows that the support of Emily's list is helpful here, and that the republican side the new organisations E-PAC and Winning for Women may have influenced that result as well.

So, this is not saying everything is fine now, but that we see in one area - political representation - signs of improvement and how specialized endorsing organizations have helped here.

Hadn't seen all that data yet. Nice find!

We've seen a lot of progress on the political representation front here in the U.S. for women since Trump's election, led by Democratic women. This article seems to suggest that the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections, which saw the biggest single-election leap in female representation in our government since 1992, almost entirely because of victories for Democratic women, has inspired the Republicans to respond with women's support groups analogous to Emily's List of their own, which are yielding results already. It goes to show the impact of women seeing other women winning, even from the other side of the aisle! Political victories for women encourage more women to run...in both parties! Which is, incidentally, the intrinsic merit I see in electing a female president. Or even just a female vice president. Doing so will tend to inspire more women, regardless of party affiliation, to run for public office at all levels in the future.

Out of the four metrics the World Economic Forum uses to gauge the relative equality of men and women in their annual Global Gender Gap reports -- health and survival, educational attainment, political empowerment, and economic participation and opportunity -- governmental representation is the single weakest area worldwide overall, and the United States is behind that world average. Overall worldwide, 25.2% of lower-house parliamentary seats were held by women as of the end of 2019, for example, while 23.4% of those seats in the United States House of Representatives are held by women, for example. In a world-historic sense, I think the fact that this is the metric that women are farthest away from equality in overall is probably the reason why it's the gap that's closing the fastest at the moment.

Last edited by Jaicee - on 03 September 2020

Jaicee said:

So I never did answer my own query from the OP, did I? Well, to do so, I think there's a lot of room for improvement here in this country and that that's especially clear when you think about the consequences of this pandemic. It's mostly women who have lost their jobs, and many of those who weren't laid off have had to "voluntarily" quit their jobs or scale back hours to stay home and take care of the kids since schools have been closed and there's been little to no child care available. Theoretically, fathers could quit their jobs instead to provide for these needs, but...fathers tend to make the most money, so it makes more financial sense for the family most often for the mom to make the sacrifices. The result? We're seeing an absolute explosion of exhaustion, anxiety, depression, and other mental illnesses among women that have taken root among men to only a fraction the extent. Also, women were often trapped with abusive partners during the lockdown period, so wife-beating, rape, domestic violence in general skyrocketed. And good luck safely giving birth in the middle of a pandemic! Or terminating a pregnancy as a result when "elective surgeries" have been banned due to covid!

And that's all just been this year! On a more fundamental level, I could talk a lot about how we badly need free child care in this country, about our need of addressing the sexual objectification of female bodies in our culture if we don't want to keep hearing "Me Too" stories all the time indefinitely, about how serious the implications of our collective decision to redefine womanhood as simply a state of mind rather than a material reality could become in the next decade or two if we keep going down this road, about how socially obligatory beauty regimens aren't just expensive and time-consuming, but can severely restrict a woman's lifestyle options, and many, many other things too numerous to list here down to things like why women are still expected to forfeit their family names upon marriage despite how supposedly equitable the institution has become here in the Western world, but it would take far too much time and effort really. The bottom line is that while the U.S. isn't exactly Saudi Arabia, it's also not exactly Iceland either, and even Iceland has real room for improvement.

Ok i feel like this is bullshit. Show me stats that show "mostly" woman have been let off work more so then men. Ya know what well your at it show me stats that show its mostly woman compared to men that have low paying jobs thats been left off work. For instance if a pub closes down that has a higher precent of women working in it then men are both left off work or just the woman?.

All this women this women that. Men have it bad too you know but no one seems to give a shit.

The is plenty of woman thats way better off then me, the is plenty of woman thats still in work here where i live and all over ireland but many men whos been left off.

I have a little girl and ill never allow her to think of herself as a victim or that she needs help or special treatment to get up in the world. Plenty of woman have done fine this whole playing the victim thing with everything is getting old. Woman have real issues just like men, When it comes to children and courts who has more rights?, whos expected to "Keep the house" going?, who has the highest depression and suicide rates?.

I think that answered everything thank you



zero129 said:

Ok i feel like this is bullshit. Show me stats that show "mostly" woman have been let off work more so then men. Ya know what well your at it show me stats that show its mostly woman compared to men that have low paying jobs thats been left off work. For instance if a pub closes down that has a higher precent of women working in it then men are both left off work or just the woman?.

All this women this women that. Men have it bad too you know but no one seems to give a shit.

The is plenty of woman thats way better off then me, the is plenty of woman thats still in work here where i live and all over ireland but many men whos been left off.

I have a little girl and ill never allow her to think of herself as a victim or that she needs help or special treatment to get up in the world. Plenty of woman have done fine this whole playing the victim thing with everything is getting old. Woman have real issues just like men, When it comes to children and courts who has more rights?, whos expected to "Keep the house" going?, who has the highest depression and suicide rates?.

I think that answered everything thank you

Okay, so let's go through this:

Taking the situation in my country as an example, here you can see the month-by-month unemployment rates for men and women respectively over the last year in the U.S. As you can see, the unemployment rate for women had been marginally lower than that of men (about 0.1 or 0.2% lower typically) before the pandemic hit. But look at when happens beginning in March and April: corresponding to the onset of covid-related restrictions and lockdowns, the jobless rate surges...but that of women rises distinctly faster, reaching a peak of 16.2% at the height of the lockdowns in April, compared to a high of 13.5% for men at the same time. You won't be surprised to learn that it was mostly service type jobs that were eliminated and that most of those were/are held by women. Also, schools were closed down and 76% of our teachers are women, child care facilities were closed and 95% of child care workers in the U.S. are women, etc. Anyway, as you can also see, the jobs market has improved since April, but even now, in the jobs report for August, women's unemployment rate is still a little higher than men's even today. The internet has come to describe the pandemic-induced crisis of this year resultantly as a "she-cession".

To your other queries/challenges:

-I don't know what the situation is over in Ireland, but here in the U.S., women were already about twice as likely as men to be diagnosed with depression, and what's more the mental health gap between men and women in this country increased by about 66% during the lockdown period.

-Aligning with this reality, women are more likely to attempt suicide than men overall, including here in the U.S. Women just use less reliable methods (e.g. are less likely to own firearms, for example). Don't worry though, the younger generation is leading a new trend toward equality of the sexes in successful suicides, as today's girls are succeeding more often in their attempts to kill themselves.

-Concerning child custody matters, I've seen lots of conflicting data, but I don't see any actual evidence to suggest that women have an advantage in child custody predeedings. Notably though, there is evidence that men win up to 70% of child custody cases that they bother to contest and are even more likely to win if accused of sexual abuse. Here's a guy who was convicted of raping his daughter and yet somehow won joint custody of her child!

Bottom Line: it's not easy to find areas of life where women are meaningfully advantaged over men.

Last edited by Jaicee - on 06 September 2020

Mnementh said:
Jaicee said:

I'm probably committing social suicide by dedicating a whole topic to women's issues on an otherwise all-male board, but oh well.

Sure, go on commit social suicide. (^_^)

Ah well, my opinion (and just my opinion) is, that there is undoubtely a lot of progress over ... say the last 100 years... but there is still some discrimination left.

I would point to wage inequality. This is a complicated topic, and true, women usually choose jobs that pay less. But I would argue it is actually the other way around: these jobs are paid less, because they are more often chosen by women.

There is no practical difference between:

"Women occupy jobs which pay less"

and

"Jobs which pay less are occupied by women"

Please clarify why you think these are different...as the consequences are entirely indistinct.