Hey, hostile visitors! Do you have an opinion about, for example, Mary Koss’ rape research? Do you want to discuss it even though the topic has not actually come up by itself in any of the threads and none of my recent posts really have much to do with the specifics of anyone’s rape research? Well, from now on you can discuss it here with anyone who wishes to follow you to this thread.
Added bonus: If you continue to try to discuss it in other threads you’ll be banned!
This also applies to future derailers riding hobbyhorses of their own having nothing to do with Koss.
Happy discussing!
Note: If you wish to discuss the topics at hand, you know, topics directly related to my posts and/or to what other people are discussing and that aren’t, you know, personal hobbyhorses of yours that involve long screeds and various things that you’ve probably already cut and pasted into the comments sections of various other websites until you were banned from them for endless derailing and general asswipery, feel free to remain in the original threads.
RE: genderneutrallanguage
There are Female only scholarships for male dominated STEM fields. This is a great idea. Nursing and Early childhood education are dramatically more gender segregated than STEM fields are.
I was under the impression that STEM fields pay much better than nursing and early childhood education. I think it may be a class issue on top of gender dynamics–women are not only socialized to be more prone to getting those types of jobs, they pay less, and men who can make more doing something else very well might go for a job they like less that makes more.
I honestly think scholarships for men would be less useful than making those jobs better-paying.
…you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Intersectionality — white women have privilege over MoC, at least in some circumstances, because of how racism and sexism interact. Trans* WoC have it worse than cis WoC, white trans* women, and trans* men in general (oh hai murder rate that’s ten times the national average)
Not intersectionality — anything that’s discussing only one axis of oppression. Be it sexism as in this case, or any other conversation limited to one axis.
Why? Because you can’t get the full picture without noting the various groups. Which is why I, and others here, keep saying “white cis men”…though to be fair that should be “white cis het men who are not disabled”
The argument that you make to disprove the strawfeminist are the aruments that I want to make, but will get shouted down if I actually do make. Is this so very hard to understand?
I GOT IT! I FIGURED IT OUT! GNL isn’t really making those straw feminist arguments, zie is using them to make Manboobzers spell out why such arguments are wrong so zie doesn’t have to develop those skills all on zie’s own! GNL isn’t being a disengenuous semantic fuck, zie’s just lazy.
Did he just say he’s employing gaslighting “I know what you think better than you do” tactics? Or am I just too tired?
Blast. That top bit is quoted from GNL.
This thread must be some weird corridor in the Argument Clinic.
She doesn’t seem to be here right now, but we have a commenter who went into nursing from a STEM field! Maybe when she gets here she can bring the lulz by explaining why there are more scholarships for STEM fields.
And then dudebro can declare that we’re proving his point by agreeing with him/not agreeing with him again. Basically whatever we say it’s proving his point, because…
Does he really think that nursing is a safer job than STEM? Because his ideas are so poorly thought out, this is what I’m thinking. Getting punched by a drunk in the ER is SO MUCH SAFER than STEM. So much.
GNL, way to ignore historical reasons women have been shunted into nursing and education.
Now wonder you didn’t win any political office.
PARROTS and EQUALITY!!!!
LBT, that’s exactly right. And when you look inside fields like nursing and K-12 teaching, you still see breakdowns of largely women being in the lower-tier positions and men being in supervisory or managerial positions, and that men in those fields make more money than women in those fields:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/02/25/male-nurses-make-more-money/
The issue isn’t that men need to be incentivized financially. The issue is changing the culture of considering some jobs “women’s work”. From this piece by one of the men’s nursing groups, a lot of men felt pushback from family or other people about nursing because it’s women’s work:
http://aamn.org/docs/meninnursing2005survey.pdf
In that piece, they also identify another reason that men don’t like nursing: it’s fairly low pay for high-stress and low prestige (“just about bedpans”, one interviewee said). Several comments identify that men are socialized more for “top” jobs like doctors.
In other words, the gender ratio we see in nursing is affected by patriarchy. Just not in the way gnl thinks it is. SURPRISE! Idiots don’t undertand the world.
Teaching hasn’t been looking so safe either in recent years.
“I honestly think scholarships for men would be less useful than making those jobs better-paying.”
Wow, I didn’t think this was even possible on this thread. Honest and reasonable disagreement. No insults or shaming. No veiled threats. No insinuations of some all powerful force that benefits men. Hell there is even agreement on the basic concept. “Less useful than” at least implies that it is a useful thing. It’s only taken 4 days to get a real response. I’m thinking it only happened because the radicals are too busy trying to make my boyfriend jealous.
So, I disagree that raising the wages would be better. It would cost much more. A full ride scholarship cost about $15,000 /year. To increase pay enough to really draw people in your looking at MILLIONS every year (if you look goably, not at a state level this would be hundreds of billions). Offering thousands of men full ride scholarships costs less (and I would like to see about 1,000 so the cost would be much less) Offering the scholarships will also help correct the gender imbalance in higher ed over all. It will be active, not passive, in breaking down gender stereotypes. With the stereotypes in place it just make these better jobs for women. Offering male only scholarships cost less, will improve gender equality in many workplaces, will break down gender stereotypes, improve parity in higher education, and break down that thought barrier that the only way to improve gender equality is to help women.
I don’t think that raising the wages of teachers will do any of that. It will help reduce the wage gap, and that would be a good thing. That is not the goal I’m trying to achieve.
You don’t think things through very well, GNL.
It’s only been 4 days? Feels like he’s been here for 4 years. Time does not fly when you’re bored.
Another hazard that nurses face is the exposure to infectious diseases, like MRSA or tuberculosis. They can get bloodborne diseases from needle stick injuries. They also risk straining their backs by handling patients in hospitals without lifting supports, or when they are too busy to get to use the lifting supports.
Another thing is that in the time that I worked at a daycare, never once did a man ever apply for a job. They probably didn’t want a job that paid $6 an hour when they could get hired at a factory and get $15 an hour. But if you want to make scholarships to try to attract men to pink collar professions, go ahead. Just understand that it’s not women keeping them out, but that men don’t want them.
“Does he really think that nursing is a safer job than STEM?”
Thanks for pointing this out, I forgot to include it. By making scholarships, not better wages, men that couldn’t otherwise afford the costs of Universities could attend. Having scholarships isn’t going to draw men from STEM fields, but from the unskilled labor force.
Way to miss my point, jackass.
And GNL yet again ignores the role of race — http://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/2012/09/04/race-and-gender-in-higher-education/
Note that the largest gender gaps are in the least represented races. And I’d assume that since the population is basically a 50/50 gender split, that 10% over representation of women means 55% women (because 10% of 50 is 5) as in, only for minorities is the gap more than a 60/40 split, and the increase in degrees going to women appears to be slowing.
And, muc as he’ll have a fit about me bringing up race, there are already scholarships for racial minorities.
“And GNL yet again ignores the role of race”
Yes, I’m making comments on a blog, not writing a disertation. There is not the time or space to be an all inclusive everything. Race is a factor. Gender is a factor. The fact that race is a factor does not mean that gender is not a factor. It’s that intersectionality thingy that you keep asserting can’t be applied to men. You need to focus on the racial factors because the gendered factors disprove the very foundations of your belief structures. I suggest “The bomb on the Brain” series by Stefbot on YouTube.
You write incoherent trash, GNL. You managed to contradict yourself in one paragraph, nice work.
We don’t need to be educated, thanks.
Also, I suggest some Pink Floyd on youtube. What?
“We don’t need to be educated, thanks.”
What you really mean is that you have the one and only truth, the absolute truth. You are all knowing and have considered all factors, no other input could possibly change your mind…..And you wonder why Atheists have problems with Femthiesits.
“You managed to contradict yourself in one paragraph, nice work.”
How. I see no contradiction in my statements. Please explain.
It must be so tiring, maintaining yourself in a constant state of frothing rage and indignation. I wonder how much he spends per month on coffee.
I don;t think he’s indignant so much as ignorant. He has zero shaming in letting that hang out.