  |
| Author |
|
Seiji
Totoro
Registration Date: 07.29.06
Location: USA
Posts: 968 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TubbieToeter
I am curious what would happen if you would take babies out of these societies and swap them with babies from the opposing tribe. If it is really only learning and no genetics (I'm supposing here that these tribes have lived like that for generations) the babies would become normal members of those tribes.
Women in men roles were not unknown before these tribes though, if one can believe Wikipedia.
I have to disagree, sorry.
Probably ten years ago (maybe it started some years earlier) this issue was often found in the media. The situation has improved a lot lately, but in the 90s women were often excluded from the studies, just as older men. Even for medicine that was for sicknesses that primarily women suffer from.
Even though it has improved a lot, the old medicine is of course not retested on women. Heart attack initiatives still complain that doctors know too little about the specifics of heart attacks for women, since women have totally different symptoms. They also complain the medicine should be specifically retested on women.
ASS has been retested by Canadians, and they found out that it is only as good as propagated as a heart attack medicine for men ... for women it doesnt seem so well.
And it was 1998 when Dr. Helen O'Connell, of the Royal Melbourne Hospital discovered astonishing facts about the size and tissue specs of the female clitoris ... her studies showed that until then there was never someone studying this part of the female body in detail until then. I hope they corrected the anatomy books in the universities by now.
With regards to the first part, that's either another part of that article or another similar article altogether, but if I remember correctly, babies raised in different societies in general from that of their biological heritage grow up just as any other child in the culture they were raised in. So, if I grew up with the Mundugumor, even if I had Arapesh biological parents, I would most likely be socialized and behave like the majority of Mundugumor males.
With regards to the second part...well...when you're wrong you're wrong, and I feel you made a plenty good case to discredit my quote. Apparantely it is, or was, more recently than I had thought, an issue that there was insufficient testing on females for certain drugs.
Also, to add to the bits about the clitoris, it seems to me that we are seeing a lot more research on all aspects pertaining to female sexuality and the sex organs than ever before because there are more women in the various fields of science than ever before. Makes sense. I'm not sure that it can be extended to a more general issue with all of research on female physiology or anatomy though. Maybe. I just don't know.
I haven't been able to find any recent articles on corporal punishment in Japan, but I have read some articles that discuss the issue of spouse, and to a lesser extent child, abuse in Japanese society, and how few outlets victims of such abuse have available to them. For example, apparently a lot of abused end up fleeing to homeless centers because there are no abuse centers. It could be infered then that Japanese mainstream society does not have abuse, or hitting in general, in its mainstream consciousness if they have a lot of domestic violence but no abuse clinics. But to be honest, I don't know enough about the subject to make a quality inference. And I realize that it doesn't directly relate to child hitting.
In the United States however it is extremely frowned upon, but that is a very new attitude. It wasn't a big deal to hit your kids as punishment when I was a kid (about 8 or 10 years ago), but now parents can get arrested for it very easily. It was completely normal to say, be in a store and to see another kid misbehaving only to get slapped really hard or to have their pants pulled down and get spanked for a few minutes. Just to be clear, it wasn't okay to BEAT your kids when I was little, and certainly not now. (or ever that I know of), though I guess a lot of people today would call slaps and spankings beatings. I know you didn't ask for this information, but I felt it was pertinent to illustrate the point that societal norms can change extremely quickly, so it might be difficult to pin down.
I'm not going to comment on Roarkiller's post since Saddles has already done an excellent and thorough job of that.
|
|
 03.13.2008, 05:26 PM |
  
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
quote:
By the way ... I was wondering, do you know how Japanese raise their kids? Is slapping them a tabu? Are the parents very dictatorial or do they discuss stuff and let their kids question them? I wonder how they get them to work so disciplined so early ... I suppose Kids of every nationality would rather play than learn ... all kids I saw in Japan were extremely well behaved ...
Japanese kids have a much more strict lifestyle than teenagers in Western countries. There is a lot of emphasis on academics and there is also a lot of competition. This has good and bad associated with it.
One of the example of the negatives is the well-known and serious bullying problem in Japanese schools. The bullying there is a lot more personal and disturbing then what we usually think of when we say "bullying", Is it a product of putting too much stress on kids? Maybe.
|
|
| 03.13.2008, 05:49 PM |
|
Mush
Baron
Registration Date: 07.30.07
Location: South of Canada
Posts: 1810 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
We must have a really unique relationship Mushka, since your arguments so often compliment, rather than contradict, my own argument (and maybe vice versa? I lost track).
Unique perhaps, but not for that reason. You're talking to a very ticked-off engineer, don't forget. Even though I'm angry, I still understand statistics. 
I fully recognize that that was a sample size of five math professors, out of the entire pool of Canadian math professors. However, they were selected at random (ie, I didn't preferentially register in courses taught by females, as I had no idea who the prof was beforehand), and having no other data on hand, I thought you might find it interesting.
I do not claim that it applies universally. I wouldn't be too surprised if there were no female math professors in Singapore since obviously you must have gotten your point of view somehow. 
My university's math department:
http://www.math.ubc.ca/index.shtml
Of the 65 profs, about 15% are female, including the department head.
Hardly equal (yet), but math profs are rarely young.
And I fully agree that the data doesn't apply for different times and different places. How many do you think it would have been a decade ago? How many a decade from now?
UBC puts up its graduating class photos in the department hallways, in date order. It's amusing and scary to walk along the hall, assessing the gender ratios of graduating classes in various faculties. 50's, 60's: No women in science or engineering. 70's: Some in science, a scattered few in engineering.
90's, 2000's: More than half of the science faculty, and making deeper inroads into engineering.
You might also find this interesting.
__________________
Post last edited by Mush on 03.13.2008, 11:59 PM.
|
|
| 03.13.2008, 11:53 PM |
|
Roarkiller
Your Daddy-O
Registration Date: 06.03.03
Location: Home, resting...
Posts: 6077 |
|
|
Found none interesting. Or rather, none I haven't read before.
I don't exactly have a tendency to take sides in a discussion; at most, I throw facts, examples and statistics to support one side more than the other. My being impartial is close to the point of being ignorant; I simply don't care what the final answer is, simply because I know that there can never be a CORRECT answer in such discussions.
If suddenly the whole world was governed by women, I'll just blink and continue with my life.
The study of human behaviour/human psyche is a subject of interest for me simply because it helps me understand and interact with people better (and second-guess their actions, which is always useful). But as far as employment/political policies go, in my very honest opinion, it's just a shitload of ego from both sides being thrown around, otherwise armchair theorists who have too much spare time in their hands.
For the record, women have an easier time finding jobs here in Singapore 
And again, I stress, it is in the area of capacity. More precisely, NATURAL capacity.
Even I can be an engineer/doctor/president if I tried. Hell, I have even thrown myself into a train of thought where I place myself as a transvestite or a gay, or a sensitive feminine guy. As it is, I simply don't bother myself with that field, and thus my capacity for that field diminishes.
If more girls feel the need to prove themselves to guys, or if more girls are exposed to fields previously dominated by men, then of course the numbers will keep increasing. That's not statistics, that's cause-and-effect.
__________________
I am me.
I am who I am.
I am Roarkiller.
No one else is me.
Roarkiller.net
Isakaya High RPG Site
quote:
Originally posted by fenkashi
Screw your opinions, they are not relevant ^^.
|
|
| 03.15.2008, 01:26 AM |
|
Mush
Baron
Registration Date: 07.30.07
Location: South of Canada
Posts: 1810 |
|
|
I think you're losing me... I'm not making claims about policy, or supporting affirmative action, or suggesting that the world would be better off if governed by women (it probably wouldn't), or that women can't find jobs (we can [especially if we want to be secretaries]).
What I'm arguing is that this idea of "natural capacity" that you, and previously OnYourMark, stand by is not one that has much factual grounding.
__________________
Post last edited by Mush on 03.15.2008, 02:26 AM.
|
|
| 03.15.2008, 02:26 AM |
|
Roarkiller
Your Daddy-O
Registration Date: 06.03.03
Location: Home, resting...
Posts: 6077 |
|
|
Mm yes, I know, but I haven't lost you. I prefer the term sidetracked
So back to the main argument then... that would be one of those arguments where you can never prove other than using brain scans or isolating humans as test subjects (like the Truman show), for the simple reason that people, or to children to be more precise, are extremely influenced by their surroundings, thus their natural capacity cannot be discovered. It's like doing a study on what a person would do in an enclosed space if there were no surveillance; you can't study the person BECAUSE there is no surveillance.
If you use brain scans, they'd be already affected by years of human interaction.
If you use human guinea pigs, you're gonna need a small island full of them, because this is for a general study.
That's armchair theory to me, food for thought for everyone else.
If anything, the best method is probably to study animals in the wild, because technically, animals live on pure instinct. Humans would be like Chimpanzees, social creatures, while that African tribe would be like insects (Black Widow anyone?)
|
|
| 03.15.2008, 09:32 AM |
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
quote:
Even I can be an engineer/doctor/president if I tried.
Technically, anyone can be an engineer/doctor/president if they tried. There are all kinds of people with many differences whether it be gender or nationality, who can be found in almost any field. If we're speaking in terms of trying, technically most things can be accomplished by anyone if they *try* hard enough. I thought this discussion was about advantages. AKA a tall man is better at basketball than a short one, or the son of a musician will probably have an advantage playing the guitar, etc.
So what's the outcome of fretting over natural capacity? I never really understood the point. I look around me, and I say men and women both doing well academically and being accepted into these sort of jobs? What exactly is the application of this in real life?
Here's my idea. If someone shows the skills to be a math professor - give them the job. If someone does not show the skills to be a math professor, reject them. Seems rather simple to me.
Post last edited by Theowne on 03.15.2008, 03:36 PM.
|
|
| 03.15.2008, 02:41 PM |
|
Mush
Baron
Registration Date: 07.30.07
Location: South of Canada
Posts: 1810 |
|
|
How do you know if they have the skills?
My guess is that even if we go by that system, it still faces troubles because:
- Women may feel they can't get certain jobs because they don't believe they have the capacity that they really do, so don't pursue it. For example, if they were raised to believe that there were "male" jobs and "female" jobs, or that men for some reason have this natural talent for math that women don't (which seems to be Roarkiller's assertion?)
- The person hiring may subconsciously misjudge the woman's proficiency when he/she finds out that the applicant is a woman.
I certainly hope the latter doesn't happen, but it also can't really be ruled out...
__________________
|
|
| 03.15.2008, 11:26 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Natural ability aside, in the U.S. women still earn around $15,000 less than men on average, no matter what job they have. That's outright discrimination, any way you look at it.
__________________
 I like tea!
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 04:22 PM |
|
Miyrru
Graphic Designer
Registration Date: 08.16.06
Location: Freezing cold Northern Ontario
Posts: 7178 |
|
|
quote:
Women may feel they can't get certain jobs because they don't believe they have the capacity that they really do, so don't pursue it. For example, if they were raised to believe that there were "male" jobs and "female" jobs, or that men for some reason have this natural talent for math that women don't (which seems to be Roarkiller's assertion?) The person hiring may subconsciously misjudge the woman's proficiency when he/she finds out that the applicant is a woman.
You do realize that this has been happening for a couple hundred years eh? Its the self-fulfilling prophecy. I through in a comment about it earlier in this argument. The idea that someone/something is inferior eventually, if widespread enough, makes that thing inferior. It is really hard to change this when it gets ingrained into society.
Using what Orphic said as an example, wither they can do the job or not, they still don't get seen as equals yet. It is discrimination, but it is still a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once again, once it spreads it is very very hard to change. Obama who will win the Democratic nomination will still lose the race for president because people still harbour thoughts of racism wither they know it or not. I think sexism has been better dealt with as of recently, but these are the problems that exist. They also fall under the category of "we can't change the situation but we all feel better if we bitch enough"
__________________
Click for Gallery^^
The truth had to be seen. Anything else was a story, entertaining but more embroidered fib then crude, shapeless fact. ~Dave Eggers
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 04:33 PM |
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
quote:
They also fall under the category of "we can't change the situation but we all feel better if we bitch enough"
I think the sexism/racism situation has changed quite a lot in the past few hundred years, actually.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 04:56 PM |
|
Miyrru
Graphic Designer
Registration Date: 08.16.06
Location: Freezing cold Northern Ontario
Posts: 7178 |
|
|
But it still exists and probably isnt going to be completely gone anytime soon eh?
__________________
Click for Gallery^^
The truth had to be seen. Anything else was a story, entertaining but more embroidered fib then crude, shapeless fact. ~Dave Eggers
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 05:09 PM |
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
Murder still exists, rape still exists, child abuse still exists, bullying still exists. Everything "still exists".
We can't eliminate all human diseases. Therefore should we stop researching to eliminate what we can?
I don't really get your point.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 05:38 PM |
|
Miyrru
Graphic Designer
Registration Date: 08.16.06
Location: Freezing cold Northern Ontario
Posts: 7178 |
|
|
But if everything still exists than we cant eliminate anything and therefore researching is pointless.
But logically, look. This stuff happens, it is bad and discriminatory, but it isnt going anywhere. Research to reduce it might only be a temporary measure before something resets the cycle and all that social change stops and we devolve. People can do what they want. I really dont care. It is my motto of life, not to interfere much with things that dont effect me. Let them research, let people debate. But aren't we just spinning our tires? As much as women are of equal intelligence (which they are) or other races being of equal intelligence (which they are) We can sit here and debate at the merits of wither or not we have natural capacity. We are looking at a static argument with an electron microscope.
__________________
Click for Gallery^^
The truth had to be seen. Anything else was a story, entertaining but more embroidered fib then crude, shapeless fact. ~Dave Eggers
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 05:45 PM |
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
Sorry, I'm still not getting it.
No matter how much we research people will still die and suffer from diseases.
However we can research and eliminate a good portion, maybe a majority, of the common diseases which affect people.
However, people will still die from diseases. But far fewer people will die from them. Many lives can be saved.
Are you then saying it is futile to research cures because we can't completely eliminate it?
Let's apply the concept to this thread.
Years and years ago, girls were taught they shouldn't try to do anything except be a good housewife.
Today, girls can see that they can accomplish more, have great examples to follow, and have in subsequent years accomplished many great things. All of this is because people wanted a change.
Were those people just "bitching to feel better" because of the fact that some people are still sexist?
Years and years ago, black people were kicked off of seats on the bus and treated as second-class citizens. And the people doing this believed it was their right. Today, most people, at least here in Toronto, would laugh at the idea of kicking a black person off a seat because of their race.
Why? Because people wanted change and then worked to create that change. People don't live in vacuums. If an environment supports sexism, the people will support sexism. If the environment supports equality, the people will support equality. It won't work for everyone, and sexism will still exist in some form. But it can be reduced, and a greater life can be had for many people.
And is that futile because it may exist in some fashion?
Post last edited by Theowne on 03.16.2008, 06:04 PM.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 05:58 PM |
|
Maho_Fushida
Baron
Registration Date: 09.11.07
Location: Walking home.
Posts: 1498 |
|
|
Sanfan, I detect here the same argument you used in the whaling discussion. "The world sucks, nothing we can do can ever make it 100% perfect so why try to do anything?" It made no sense there either. It looks like this is your attitude to life.
This is such a bleak attitude and I want to tell you that you do not need to live it, the world and specifically your world can be changed for the better with effort.
I'm going to stop preaching, its your life, but I suspect with a gear shift in attitude it could be a quite different one.
I face sexism in my industry on an almost daily basis, and I gently fight it every day merely with my actions. I never raise my voice in a face to face confrontation with sexists, I just get on and demonstrate I'm their equal.
__________________
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 06:12 PM |
|
Miyrru
Graphic Designer
Registration Date: 08.16.06
Location: Freezing cold Northern Ontario
Posts: 7178 |
|
|
Diseases are different. Diseases are physical and can actually be eliminated or cured so that they are ineffective. That is kinda a bad example. I understand your point in the example, but it is a bit inapplicable.
We are looking at things too closely which is probably what I want to get across. Yes it is good that equality is starting to form, but it really is still in a static state.
I see what you are saying and I cant really form much of an argument against it. But the part of me that is a realist looks at the situation and from where I am standing I see slow, slow, glacial changes from here on out. There are still things that limit equality of opportunity, not to mention capitalism exists to create divisions. Where do we go from here? Can we even get by that hump? I personally don't think so.
quote:
Why? Because people wanted change and then worked to create that change. People don't live in vacuums. If an environment supports sexism, the people will support sexism. If the environment supports equality, the people will support equality. It won't work for everyone, and sexism will still exist in some form. But it can be reduced, and a greater life can be had for many people.
The only thing that I can grab from this is that it can work in the reverse. People who are in great position of power are mostly males, if they wanted to they could slash womens rights and we are back to square one. I am just not that optimistic that we as a society are ever moving forward. Good on you for being somewhat of an optimist but realistically, it could all be undone and we are back to square one.
EDIT @:Fushy, sorry for being pessimistic, but that is how I am. I like to be a realist. Things dont change over night, most of the time we have little control over the things around us. Wouldn't it be great if we all lived in a utopian society and we are all happy and equal? Sure, id sign up for that. But the only thing is that it will never happen. Which is reality to me. Look hard, you tell me you face sexism on a daily basis, are those people ever going to change? Have we really made that much progress when it still exists on a daily basis.
__________________
Click for Gallery^^
The truth had to be seen. Anything else was a story, entertaining but more embroidered fib then crude, shapeless fact. ~Dave Eggers
Post last edited by Miyrru on 03.16.2008, 06:18 PM.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 06:15 PM |
|
Theowne
Baron
Registration Date: 02.11.07
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1290 |
|
|
quote:
Good on you for being somewhat of an optimist but realistically
See, the thing is, I don't consider myself an optimist. In my honest opinion, I label myself a realist and I would consider the "we can't change anything" view to be a pessimistic one and not a realistic one.
A few hundred years ago, women were expected to be housewives.
Today, women are accepted as equals by the majority of people in a developed society and also many in the developing world.
A few hundred years ago basically all women were housewives. Today, there are women teachers, physicists, chemists, engineers.
And yet, you're saying that I'm an optimist for believing change is possible, and you're a realist for saying it's futile? Are you really sure about that?
Post last edited by Theowne on 03.16.2008, 06:36 PM.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 06:32 PM |
|
Miyrru
Graphic Designer
Registration Date: 08.16.06
Location: Freezing cold Northern Ontario
Posts: 7178 |
|
|
Its hard to argue this without becoming close to being sexist or overly discriminatory. I glad we have women doing things, but was it really all that bad before? Women would disagree with me but would men all support them an admit: "Yeah sorry our bad?" What is the ideal society? Do we even know? I can't answer any of these things because I don't know. What is teh developed society? Can we even answered that? Never ending questions stem from this. I don't know there is too much for me to even care.
But to me, as I consider myself a realist, I dont care that our definitions may differ, things change. Not always for the best and not always for the people who need it, or want it. Any change has repercussions. With the increase in females having careers, why has there been a major increase in failed marriages and broken families? Are those connected. I just dont know. Change is happening, but I would say that equality has run its course, and I see divisions on teh horizon. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the world really does exist in rose coloured glasses. I'll stay pessimistic anything that i see that improves things is welcome. But when we go to hell in a handbasket I can 'i told you so
And I'm out of this argument.
__________________
Click for Gallery^^
The truth had to be seen. Anything else was a story, entertaining but more embroidered fib then crude, shapeless fact. ~Dave Eggers
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 06:51 PM |
|
Mush
Baron
Registration Date: 07.30.07
Location: South of Canada
Posts: 1810 |
|
|
Too many things to quote, so I'll just use the bold function instead. In roughly chronological order...
"Its hard to argue this without becoming close to being sexist or overly discriminatory"
That's ok, just play the devil's advocate if you like. I know you think that women are equals, so I won't label you a sexist... just a pessimist for thinking that change isn't possible.
"I glad we have women doing things, but was it really all that bad before?"
I can rant and rant about how it was all that bad before, but maybe the best way would be for you to consider if today's society looked the same, but opposite. Pretend that the thought of a man being capable of holding a career is laughable, and the mention of a man deciding not to marry and raise children sparks outrage. Add corsets to taste, and perhaps some arsenic for your mandatory makeup. Your wife routinely beats you, and - divorce? What the heck is that?
Anyway... I think our progress since then has been more than glacial.
"What is the ideal society? ...Can we even answer that?"
Instead of identifying what that is in advance, and trying to work towards it all at once, why don't we take a more measured approach:
- Accept that we are not in an ideal society already,
- Find the reasons that this society is not ideal,
- Work to resolve those reasons, one by one, in the most ideal way we can.
Society is a little bit like Wikipedia in this way. Sure, people vandalize it now and then and make trouble, but as time goes on it only gets better and better.
Before you know it, you'll be there.
"With the increase in females having careers, why has there been a major increase in failed marriages and broken families? Are those connected?"
To play off an old global warming joke... With the decline of sea pirates, why has there been a major increase in failed marriages and broken families? Are those connected?
Maybe try to find a reason that this might be the case, before assuming that it is. Also, ask if there actually has been a "major increase" in failed marriages and broken families - or were those simply swept under the rug before? Or are there even as many now as you seem to think there are?
"Change is happening, but I would say that equality has run its course"
Why run its course? I see equality as something of a stable steady state; it's the societal arrangement with the least unrest. Any deviation from equality increases unrest, and people protest and take action to drive it back towards equality.
There's no turning back now, save for some kind of virus that targets the Y chromosome...
"anything that i see that improves things is welcome"
Then why are you so reluctant to make the littlest effort to lay out a welcome mat?
"And I'm out of this argument."
No turning your back on someone during a discussion, remember?
__________________
Post last edited by Mush on 03.16.2008, 11:25 PM.
|
|
| 03.16.2008, 11:23 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Online Ghibli
Ghibli Tavern is powered by WoltLab, hosted by Teragon Networks
|
|
