Gender equality debate

[Hellsmk2]

All very true but the Norway “experiment” isn’t just about CEOs, it’s board members in general. Incidentally, Freakonimics has just done a series of podcasts on CEOs which is really good — including an excellent interview with Indra Nooyi, the CEO of PepsiCo.



"Have to be" was the wrong phrasing in my earlier post, apologies. You're right, there's no requirement within the job spec for them to be more qualified, it's just a fact that they are. Whether it's because the women themselves are self-selecting or whether it's because women with the same qualifications as their male counterparts aren't appointed is harder to ascertain, but it's certainly a pattern that's worth investigating.

Interestingly, the Economist article shows that although Norway's quota has reduced the gender pay gap for those women at board level, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that promoting more women to board level has had many benefits (if any) for the women working in those companies below board level.



Good post.

I do wonder whether those people complaining about SJWs or feminists or BLM feel that the civil rights movement achieved its purpose and now everyone should just keep quiet…

It's not about keeping quiet, it's about acknowledging that equality is more than "hurr durr patriarchy, white men oppressors."

That just isn't a helpful point of view. When the main way of arguing a point is the assumption that men are the enemy, you are wrong. Plain and simple. Even more so when the points they raise have been heavily discredited time and time again by academics the world over.

 

[Irish_Tom]

- No I'm not saying people should keep quiet, people should campaign for whatever they believe in. I only take issue with them denying other people that same right. E.g. I want men to be able to campaign for men's rights without being called misogynist. I want white men to be able to campaign against 'positive' discrimination without being called sexist, racist, bigot, nazi, etc. Equality, basically.

It's not about keeping quiet, it's about acknowledging that equality is more than "hurr durr patriarchy, white men oppressors."

That just isn't a helpful point of view. When the main way of arguing a point is the assumption that men are the enemy, you are wrong. Plain and simple. Even more so when the points they raise have been heavily discredited time and time again by academics the world over.

So it's only the actual men-hating feminists you have a problem with, not feminism in general? What proportion of all feminists would you say fall into that category?

- Yes the civil rights movement achieved its purpose.

There's no denying that the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s succeeded in ending the legalised racial segregation and discrimination laws in the United States — but I don't think that it necessarily achieved the broader aims of race equality — otherwise groups like BLM wouldn't exist today. Similarly with feminism — despite all of the laws passed over the last 100 years there are clearly unresolved issues.

 

[Randomface74]

So it's only the actual men-hating feminists you have a problem with, not feminism in general? What proportion of all feminists would you say fall into that category?

If it was just about women's issues then it wouldn't be a problem for me, but Feminism today includes being anti-male on the basis that all their problems were caused by the patriarchy (according to them). Find a feminist and start a discussion and they'll soon revert to how everything is your fault because of your gender. It's like when you talk to a Christian and sooner or later they tell you they're right because the Bible says so. Talk to feminists about equal opportunity and they'll call you a misogynist because what they really want is not equal outcome, but for the outcome to favour women. Speak to some feminists, I don't know where they get their views from, but they have widely accepted this as their stance without most people realising.

There's no denying that the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s succeeded in ending the legalised racial segregation and discrimination laws in the United States — but I don't think that it necessarily achieved the broader aims of race equality — otherwise groups like BLM wouldn't exist today. Similarly with feminism — despite all of the laws passed over the last 100 years there are clearly unresolved issues.

I agree there are still issues, but as they aren't caused by law then that counts as 'done' to me. For example, it's illegal to pay people different amounts for the same work because of their gender, but feminists will quote the gender pay gap (which just shows different pay, not different pay for the same work, thereby creating a conflict where there shouldn't be one). Black people can do all the same stuff white people can do, they have equal opportunity, but BLM would rather rant about how white men are racist than actually take the opportunities and work hard. They want equal or favoured outcome handed to them rather than work for it, thereby creating a conflict where there shouldn't be one. .... my overall point being that there aren't unresolved issues -- people are creating new issues for no good reason, seems they just want someone to shout at.

 

[stockhausen]

. . . Feminism today includes being anti-male on the basis that all their problems were caused by the patriarchy (according to them). Find a feminist and start a discussion and they'll soon revert to how everything is your fault because of your gender. . . . Talk to feminists about equal opportunity and they'll call you a misogynist because what they really want is not equal outcome, but for the outcome to favour women. Speak to some feminists, I don't know where they get their views from, but they have widely accepted this as their stance without most people realising. . . .

For someone who appears to hate Feminists with a vengance, you seem to come into contact with them an awful lot.

I can't say that I recognise your description of women at all - perhaps I have never encountered a Feminist.

 

[Rroff]

Talk to feminists about equal opportunity and they'll call you a misogynist because what they really want is not equal outcome, but for the outcome to favour women.

TBH you'll find this with many people regardless of gender, etc. they'll bang on about equality or fairness but consciously or unconsciously what they really want is "fairness" on their terms regardless of the actual impact on anyone else.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Am I the only one who spots the hypocrisy in this?

Are you going to tune in on the night and post a running commentary on the outrageous things they're saying with no man to keep them balanced and fair... with no male voice to keep them in check?

<rage> They better not be screeching about VAT free Tampons again. </rage>

<rager> Tissues at the ready, finger hovered over the pause button </rager>

 

[Randomface74]

For someone who appears to hate Feminists with a vengance, you seem to come into contact with them an awful lot.

Plenty of the women you see every day will be feminists too. I only know about their views because I ask them. Y'know. ... conversation

 

[stockhausen]

Plenty of the women you see every day will be feminists too. I only know about their views because I ask them. Y'know. ... conversation

Judging by your consistently antagonistic attitude to women, perhaps it would be better all round if you were to leave them alone?

 

[VincentHanna]

Plenty of the women you see every day will be feminists too. I only know about their views because I ask them. Y'know. ... conversation

Rubbish. I work in an office of 2 men and 8 women and the topic barely comes up here.

Who goes around talking to random women about feminism when they meet anyway?

I've only ever met one overt feminist in my entire life, and even she didn't hate men or anything.

Billysielu has been watching too much Youtube.

 

[Randomface74]

Judging by your consistently antagonistic attitude to women, perhaps it would be better all round if you were to leave them alone?

Thanks for your sarcy comment. Due to your antagonistic attitude towards me, perhaps it would be better if you leave me alone.

Rubbish. I work in an office of 2 men and 8 women and the topic barely comes up here.

Who goes around talking to random women about feminism when they meet anyway?

I've only ever met one overt feminist in my entire life, and even she didn't hate men or anything.

Billysielu has been watching too much Youtube.

Yes I talk to people about politics. I ask them what they think about x, y, z. Usually just whatever's in the news that day, it's often on the TV in the lunch room at work and that's how it gets started.

I only know 2 'overt' feminists, i.e. they post about it on facebook all the time and it annoys everyone. One even has a concealed feminist tattoo.

I was talking about average women though - you don't get to know their beliefs unless you talk to them, and once you do it's surprising how extreme they are.

Thanks for your sarcy comment about YouTube. I actually don't watch YouTube much at all. Like I said, most of this is learnt from talking to people IRL.

One thing I will say is it may well be more prevalent in Oxford than in other places in the UK, I wouldn't know.

 

[VincentHanna]

What is "extreme" in your eyes?

 

[Roar87]

My girlfriend isn't a Feminist, she thinks women should just work harder, then again she works 40+ hour weeks and runs an eBay business on the side. Funnily enough she's never felt discriminated against at work, probably because she's always the hardest worker and the best at her job. Now if only she understood technology...

 

[francky]

a lot of people in this thread confuse radical feminists with the average woman.....most are completely seperate and the average woman is certainly not the blue haired, man hating feminist...unfortunetely they are a small group with a loud voice and it seems some men cant seperate the two.

 

[Orionaut]

There's no denying that the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s succeeded in ending the legalised racial segregation and discrimination laws in the United States — but I don't think that it necessarily achieved the broader aims of race equality — otherwise groups like BLM wouldn't exist today. Similarly with feminism — despite all of the laws passed over the last 100 years there are clearly unresolved issues.

The civil rights movement might well have ended legalised segregation, but it also set back social and economic progress for Black Americans by 50 years or more.

Desegregation destroyed the economics of inner city America and the surge in Black/Black homicides that was the result of this probably cost the lives of over 100,000 people.

There is a hell of a lot of Pyrrhic in the victory of the civil rights movement...

 

[Randomface74]

What is "extreme" in your eyes?

Usually they start blaming the patriarchy for everything, men in the past ruled everything therefore men now must pay, that sort of thing.
They base some decision-making off this, like:
- hire a woman over a man for a job because of gender (men shouldn't have right to equal opportunity)
- take all a man's wealth in a divorce because it's about time men paid up (men shouldn't have the right to enjoy their property)
- belief that male opinions don't matter, and should be silenced (men shouldn't have the right to speak on contentious topics)

 

[D.P.]

a lot of people in this thread confuse radical feminists with the average woman.....most are completely seperate and the average woman is certainly not the blue haired, man hating feminist...unfortunetely they are a small group with a loud voice and it seems some men cant seperate the two.

Most feminists are also not man hating. In fact the complete fanatics can hardly be described as feminists despite what they call themselves.

 

[Randomface74]

Most feminists are also not man hating. In fact the complete fanatics can hardly be described as feminists despite what they call themselves.

This is one of the things I'm trying to clarify in this thread, that yes there are crazy activists, and most women aren't activists, but when quizzed about it, a lot more women than you'd think really do agree with the activists.

Any of you can test this for yourself by talking to some of the women you know. Maybe you get different results to me, who knows.

 

[francky]

Most feminists are also not man hating. In fact the complete fanatics can hardly be described as feminists despite what they call themselves.

Hence why I said Radical feminists....the fringe....but the ones with the loudest voice driving the narrative.

 

[VincentHanna]

Why do you think the fringe are the ones with the loudest voice?

 

[francky]

Why do you think the fringe are the ones with the loudest voice?

Because they are the ones actively pursuing for change, they are the ones protesting against men rights meetings, they are the ones lobbying governments and arranging marches....the average female that considers herself a feminist gets on with her life and isnt an activist, but may attend the marches.

The extremes always drive the narrative.