More Gender Wars

[sologdin]

enjoying the debate

sometimes a good debate is enjoyable.

and sometimes, like in the old jesus sucks chat on aol 15 years ago, it was more enjoyable to lure adversaries, via the chat title, and laugh at their anger.

[Elder Sister]

enjoying the debate

sometimes a good debate is enjoyable.

and sometimes, like in the old jesus sucks chat on aol 15 years ago, it was more enjoyable to lure adversaries, via the chat title, and laugh at their anger.

well, yeah. That's a fun time, too.

[James Arryn]

James arryn, could you consider for a moment that your experiences of being called a slut and a whore are not typical of generic men at large given that you claim specifically to have been an actual prostitute?

Again, that's not my argument. The argument presented (originally) was that you never hear men labeled with words which censure their promiscuity because they do not exist, not a one.

I objected to the first part because I have jeard it myself, and the second part because the word slut by definition includes men.

Then the argument shifted goalposts to ask for more examples...I gave more examples.

A sideline arose about the degree to which those hurt the targets; I gave anecdotal evidence to support the idea that it's not a universally happy response because, like everyone else here, I do not have the information to give any other kind of opinion on that subject; studies may have been done on 'how much men are hurt by being called a slut', but none of us have cited them.

So at no point was the argument or my position in it either that men are called slut as often as women, or that all men are called slut as often as I have been. I was arguing against an assertion of fact that was wholly incorrect.

For the record, I have been called slut before I worked as an escort, since, and by people who had no idea I'd ever done that. Close friends and family know, and people I knew through that world know, but many others do not, and it's been a while, anyways.

Because using your life experiences as a counter argument to general statements is interesting but not particularly useful, and only derails the conversations.

Right. And as noted, that was only the sole basis for my argument re: how I felt when called a slut, or why I felt it. But since none of here are offering data, the arguments about how often men are called slut is itself a collage of personal experiences. So if you thought that the basis for my argument, you would correctly suggest it is not helpful, but then you would also have to suggest that the conversation isn't helpful; it's merely what people here feel is true based on their personal experiences.

And as secondary evidence for my position, there is not the list of words which do connote censure towards men for promiscuity, but the (seemingly agreed by many in the discussion) fact that those are increasingly defined in the dictionary. They would be increasing, it can logically be assumed, because they are more often used.

Hope this helps.

[Happy Ent]

Turning the table, virgin is used intentionally as a slur towards males in a way it’s never used against females.

So the sex difference in what kind of behaviour is ridiculed is presumably correct. (It certainly is easily explained by a variety of explanatory models, no matter where your epistemological biases lie. There are very coherent explanations from structural reductionism to evolutionary psychology. All make complete sense. All of them predict that women would be ridiculed for promiscuity, men for failure to reproduce.)

I think this is trivial.

Where I don’t follow is that some of you are able attach moral outrage to this, to me completely obvious and trivial, phenomenon. I can’t even see which side this state of affairs is hurting.

(As a first approximation, it seems men are the butt of far harsher discrimination here. It’s a lot more hurtful to be a virgin than a slut, it has the most extreme consequence imaginable to a living organism (failure to reproduce), and it’s very difficult to change if allegation is actually correct. Compare the two cases: the slut can just keep her knickers on. The virgin can’t as easily change his behaviour to be admitted to the group of males that have access to sex.)

But it’s a fair question: what would you rather be, and what would you rather be slandered as: a female slut? or a male virgin? (For the record, I am neither.)

I have difficulties identifying which sex is subject to harsher sexual insults.

ETA: This is mainly to stop the (inanely framed) discourse about “calling men sluts”. Of course men wouldn’t be ridiculed for promiscuity. How would that ever make sense? Of course men and women are treated differently and especially with respect to their attitudes to reproduction. The only interesting question is if that is wrong. For the record, I have no insightful opinion on that and consider the question ill posed.

[sologdin]

no insightful opinion on that

therein lies the error of evopsych posturing: it is generally irrelevant to the political question at issue. what matters it if there is a neo-hobbesian answer to the issue of why virgin is bad for males and slut is bad for females? (FTR i dispute whether female promiscuity as bad for reproduction, though i can see why those who take a proprietary attitude toward women might think it is.)

[Chaldanya]

ETA: This is mainly to stop the (inanely framed) discourse about “calling men sluts”. Of course men wouldn’t be ridiculed for promiscuity. How would that ever make sense? Of course men and women are treated differently and especially with respect to their attitudes to reproduction. The only interesting question is if that is wrong. For the record, I have no insightful opinion on that and consider the question ill posed.

Why wouldn't it be wrong. Why is society as a whole still not grown up enough to realise that there should be no value judgement placed upon how often people have sex (with the usual caveat of only consenting adults need apply)

Just as slut is now being applied to men using virgin as a slur towards a woman is now gaining traction.

N

[Lyanna Stark]

Just saw this too. I don't agree with your assessment of my position...not thinking sexism and classism are linked in in fact central to my point...but this is an interesting post regardless, and I'm unfortunately too brain-dead...literally been typing for about 24 hours now...to give it the response it merits. Will do so if I remember after I get some sleep.

Meanwhile, cheers.

Hmm, not sure I understand what you mean correctly here: do you think it's linked, or you think it's not linked? (Just to make sure I understand your position.)

(As a first approximation, it seems men are the butt of far harsher discrimination here. It’s a lot more hurtful to be a virgin than a slut, it has the most extreme consequence imaginable to a living organism (failure to reproduce), and it’s very difficult to change if allegation is actually correct. Compare the two cases: the slut can just keep her knickers on. The virgin can’t as easily change his behaviour to be admitted to the group of males that have access to sex.)

That's not true. Since slut is used as a term which is determined by culture. Slut has different meanings depending on where you live, for instance, and with what people you associate. While a virgin is simply someone who hasn't had sex. The second can be remedied easily by just having sex, the second...well, how do you get rid of a reputation without moving to a completely different part of the country and getting completely new friends and acquaintances? It's often not possible.

Ergo, it's the opposite of what you claim here HE: a virgin can remedy the situation, while the "slut" cannot. Once a slut, always a slut, since it's not a comment on an actual state, nor on a person's actual amount of sexual partners or behaviour, it's just an derogatory term that may or may not have anything to do with actual sexual behaviour and amount of sexual partners.

[TerraPrime]

Turning the table, virgin is used intentionally as a slur towards males in a way it’s never used against females.

And yet, "virgin" is a concept developed to commoditize females, no? Or have we had historical periods where a man was judged as more worthy and more moral based on his lack of sexual experience? I guess some religious orders that glorify abstinence may apply, but for society as a whole?

So I don't think the table is turning as much as you'd like it to be.

[Guest Raidne]

Lol.

My thoughts? If you start with a conclusion, don't be surprised if you end up agreeing with yourself.

I'm not remotely covert, aggressive only in sports, and not even a little sexist.

But carry own with your own, don't let me stop you.

I didn't start with a conclusion, never do. I make an effort to be open-minded about positions I disagree with because often the discussion is more interesting. I just can't follow what your position is because of all the gaps in logic, so I asked for clarification to see if that would help and didn't get any.

[Tempra]

That's not true. Since slut is used as a term which is determined by culture. Slut has different meanings depending on where you live, for instance, and with what people you associate. While a virgin is simply someone who hasn't had sex. The second can be remedied easily by just having sex, the second...well, how do you get rid of a reputation without moving to a completely different part of the country and getting completely new friends and acquaintances? It's often not possible.

Presumably only a few grown adult males chose to be virgins. Saying that they can lose their virginity by "just having sex" grossly misses the point. Short of hiring a prostitute (and then being associated with that stigma), they can't change their status easily.

ETA: I am not sure, but I imagine being known as "the guy who couldn't get laid until he was 40" is a pretty hard reputation to lose as well.

[Guest Raidne]

I will say that I'm not 100% positive James is a covertly aggressive sexist or anything, because it is also true that I'm not really able to figure out what he's saying due to what I thought was a language barrier at first, but due to the average length of posts from James, I'm really not entirely sure what the issue is.

For my part, I'm certainly not "against men," more than half of my closest friends are men and I very much enjoy hanging out with mixed-gender groups, and people from different classes, races, sexual orientations etc.

I am against sexism, and, as is necessary to call oneself a "feminist" I think it is a real and continuing problem.

Having said that, things get amazingly better all the time - they are even better than they were in noticeable ways since I was in high school. If active steps are taken, sexism can be combated in important ways, and is in many places. Equal pay, as I said, is not an issue in my office, and neither is the glass ceiling. The President even nominated a woman to be our next "Chairman" if Congress will ever approve her. Sexual harassment is still a problem at my office though. Remember my male coworker who took me to what is a strip club on the weekends for lunch so that he could try to trick me into going there with him for happy hour when it was in full swing later? The guy who used to corner me in my office and rub my shoulders? Well, I've heard far worse stories than that, still, from people who were forced to file official complaints.

So, progress, but sexism is still a problem.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

So, progress, but sexism is still a problem.

This exactly.

Looking back, my views on this have significantly evolved over the years as I have been in the workplace. When I was in college I did not believe that sexism in the workplace was a problem for me. Period. It was something we had conquered. There were laws for that, after all. My own experiences seemed to back it up. I'd never had any problems at school. I had never had any problems landing a job, and I was well reviewed in all of them. I won awards. Gosh darn it, people liked me. Yes, some frat boys were sexist pigs, but I truly believed they'd just grow up at some point (many of them, btw, have), and at the end of the day, my merit, and the merit of the other men and women that I knew, would determine OUR experience in the work place (which, of course, was going to be much different than our parents).

And, in some sense, my own personal story in the workplace seems to support that. I've been consistently highly reviewed and rated and progressively promoted. I've never had any reason to think that my bonus is less than someone with an equivalent rating and number of hours. I have no reason to be unhappy with my compensation at the level I am at now. BUT, over the years one notices things. At first a few. Then more. Then they start to add up and you sit and wonder, but some of the things you are noticing, well, they don't fit your own personal model. I've had AMAZING conversations happen in front of me. People sort of start to forget I'm there, I guess. You see promotion patterns in general and statistically things start to fall apart on the edges of your theories. You go to client meetings and you feel like you are in the middle of that Sesame Street song ("one of these things is not like the other"). Then, worse, you finally have a meeting where there are a lot of women and you absolutely notice it because it's such an outlier. And you wonder. . . . . and your little rosy picture of the workplace starts to break down around the edges, and then maybe a little bit more.

Anyhow, my two cents.

[Elder Sister]

Yes, yes, yes to Mlle. Z.

I have been successful, but I'm not the norm in my industry. And the biggest thing is, I have had to grit my teeth, grin, and work twice as hard for it because I'm a woman. I'm not being hypocritical when I say this. If I hadn't accepted this faact, I would still be slogging away as a flunkie for some dept. manager.

It's the reality of the industry I'm in. Men are in control; they have a tendency to hire people like them, and promote their pals. This is why women, gays and minorities have it so much tougher.

I have spent the past 20 years finding ways around the system that didn't compromise my integrity. That's not to say that everyone doesn't have to deal with unfairness - we all do. But as women, there are times when it's based strictly on my sex. And I'm hoping that will eventually change.

I understand this is all anecdotal.

[TerraPrime]

You see promotion patterns in general and statistically things start to fall apart on the edges of your theories. You go to client meetings and you feel like you are in the middle of that Sesame Street song ("one of these things is not like the other"). Then, worse, you finally have a meeting where there are a lot of women and you absolutely notice it because it's such an outlier. And you wonder. . . . . and your little rosy picture of the workplace starts to break down around the edges, and then maybe a little bit more.

Yes.

Also, being a man, I've had a couple of experience where someone assumed that I'd be okay with certain views about women in our line of work, and made some comments that I don't think (or I hope) they would have made in mixed companies. For instance, someone once commented in a committee meeting I was in that the under-representation of women in STEM is a red herring because women just want to have babies any ways and you can't do good science when your mind is on your children. And the person saying it was not in his 60s and on his way to retirement - he was in his 40s and the peak of his own career, and he runs a lab with over a dozen students and postdoc scientists.

[Balefont]

Four years ago, I confronted the Regional Manager about the fact that only 11% of our entry level positions were filled with women (I still have the emails!). He disagreed with my initial points but after meeting with him, he began to see the writing on the wall and made some changes. We both agreed that hiring the best candidate was paramount but that because most of the referrals were coming from guys just out of college and the referrals were for their buddies, the women applying weren't getting fair representation.

For years after that, he'd make it a point to stop by and tell me "I just hired another woman!". So, progress, I guess. :)

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Yes.

Also, being a man, I've had a couple of experience where someone assumed that I'd be okay with certain views about women in our line of work, and made some comments that I don't think (or I hope) they would have made in mixed companies. For instance, someone once commented in a committee meeting I was in that the under-representation of women in STEM is a red herring because women just want to have babies any ways and you can't do good science when your mind is on your children. And the person saying it was not in his 60s and on his way to retirement - he was in his 40s and the peak of his own career, and he runs a lab with over a dozen students and postdoc scientists.

You know, you'd be surprised what people will say in moderately mixed company (e.g., if there's one woman in the room that they are really comfortable with, who otherwise talks sports etc., so you know).

[Guest Raidne]

Then they start to add up and you sit and wonder, but some of the things you are noticing, well, they don't fit your own personal model. I've had AMAZING conversations happen in front of me.

And this. I honestly have expected it because I took a lot of feminism classes in college and was primarily interested in employment discrimination in law school, but nothing has ever happened to me, personally, other than sexual harassment, that I'd really see sexism in my own experiences with work and academia if I wasn't looking for it, and by "looking for it" I mean that I intentionally learned integrative negotiation so I had a skill set to put to work when people seemed to be responding negatively to a forthright, assertive style from a female. And it works - there are a lot of occasions where I've regrouped and gone back in from that place, using the things I've learned and everything has been A-OK whereas if I hadn't been watching for it, I just would have lost whatever it was I was trying to get and I would have chalked it up to something else.

For years after that, he'd make it a point to stop by and tell me "I just hired another woman!". So, progress, I guess. :)

He should get some binders.

You know, you'd be surprised what people will say in moderately mixed company (e.g., if there's one woman in the room that they are really comfortable with, who otherwise talks sports etc., so you know).

In my office, where half the management is female, people will say, well, sure she's good, but she hasn't been around that long yet, but she is female...(yes, people seem to think I am the sort of person you can say that in front of?)

I am here late all the time so I can tell you who else is, and they are all women. Three of us are not rarely here until 2am on weekdays, and all three of us are female. And that woman in that quote above was the same way, and probably the best writer out of all 300 other attorneys to boot.

[Nukelavee]

Your experiences are not universal. Believe it.

And neither are yours...but, somehow, yours are supposed to trump JA'S?

And, as I've said before, that tendency to make statements like that here, but deny them there, is a huge problem on this board.

What I get from feminsism isn't that men need to be "brought low" in order to acheive gender equality but actually feminists are working towards elevating women and to hell with men's current positions.

But, you do realize how that statement can be read, tho, right? Fuck males, lets ride right over those bastards!

I realize that's more than likely not what was meant, but it definitely skews the message in terms of tone, don't you think?

People seem wired to respond to certain tones of statement as though it is an actual conflict, rather than an evolution of thought.

(and, actually, I read that quote as "we are going to achieve what we want to, because we are entitled to do so; and whether it makes males uncomfortable or angry isn't going to be a factor". Which, actually, I'm fine with.)

Question - do you think your/our views of the topic are all off base, in that they are really based upon our own age groups? I don't mean utterly wrong, I mean that some of the points, like terms, aren't things we can expect to actually have an accurate understanding of? Clearly, one group of us sees the word slut as far less insulting than the other, when applied to a specific gender... but does that mean the word has teh same value of insult/sexism for younger (teens to say mid 20's), as it does for those of us, say, 30-40ish?

I think it takes an exceptional kind of mind to be able to live through a period, and it's values, etc, while demanding change, but still be able to realize that things are changing behind/underneath them at the same time, and factor those changes in perspective into how they view th ebig picture.

I don't think any of us, here, have that ability.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

And not to be a totally Negative Nelly, there are things that the place I work does REALLY well. I got six months paid maternity, for instance. It has not affected my prospects (at all). We are trying to tackle head on recruitment and retention problems (step 1 - admit you have a problem. At least we do). Though our management committee is overwhelmingly male, it is not wholly so. So, I'm actually thankful that it's not just me noticing things. Awareness will, I hope, sponsor incremental change. We shall see.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

I think it takes an exceptional kind of mind to be able to live through a period, and it's values, etc, while demanding change, but still be able to realize that things are changing behind/underneath them at the same time, and factor those changes in perspective into how they view th ebig picture.

I don't think any of us, here, have that ability.

I think, on the flip side, one of the things you miss is how the culture that your cohort (I'm avoiding "generation", because I think it's largely meaningless in this construct) creates for itself also affects the bigger picture. Back to my earlier post - I did plenty of things that certainly did not help the cause (bought in and participated in the hookup culture in college; failed to appreciate, and in fact actively derided, ongoing feminist efforts; etc. etc.).