131–140 of 356 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Men schools, once regarded in the same way, are now being attacked, one of the best schools in the US for example is being sued for not taking female students, and a common tag attached to them is "Backwards" or "medieval" or "inquisitors" Which school?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_colleges_in_the_United_Sta... EDIT: I can't comment as to the criticism; I haven't heard any.
Doesn't any such law exist in the US?
In recent times I've gotten the impression that their is a double standard going on regarding certain (not all) services and events that are only targeted to women. If this had been an app for men rating and alerting them about certain women all hell would of broke loose.
Google "Black Book Apps". There should be hundreds of them, I assume.
I have two reactions to this, and I think most people who care about sexism in our society would agree with both: 1. From the sound of it, this is a horribly sexist product that dehumanizes men and reinforces traditional gender roles. I hope to one day see a world where an app like this couldn't exist because there would be no demand (and because everyone would be disgusted by the basic concept). 2. Actively opposing…
You clearly believe this, but that's what it is, your belief. I disagree; women may have "much farther to go," but that doesn't mean this is somehow intrinsically less important to people who really do support equality.
There is nothing wrong with establishing your own priorities. Calling this a lower one with the justification that you are more concerned about women's issues, instead of issues of sexual equality as a whole, would have been more honest. Less benevolent, but then nobody's perfect: Better to be clearly flawed, like the rest of us, than to fabricate some sort of intrinsic dominance where a true egalitarian would find none.
Where are all the feminists now? This is the perfect example of double-standards implied by women. Imagine an alternative scenario where men could rate their female counterparts on the basis of their 'assets' as defined by some vague methodology. Imagine how much fire under men would be, with ALL men being broadly labelled as sexists because this app was targeted at men. I am seriously asking - Where are all the femi…
> I am seriously asking - Where are all the feminists now? Especially the ones who know this app.. Don't worry, they are certainly ready with the argument that it is the "patriarchy" that makes this app acceptable but not the reverse.
If you don't, then you might want to pause for a few minutes and seriously ask yourself why you said what you did. Because from my experience, opposing a service like this is a core value of feminism. (It may not be seen as a top priority, but that's a radically different statement.)
I'm amazed at the kinds of apps which exist and get exposure. This is stuff which might have been fun in high school, but there are actual adults using this. Not to mention the insane double standard. I'd love to see a man make a similar app for rating women this way. I'm sure there would be news reports and tons of angry feminists flooding the airwaves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's quite as dramatic as you say. But personally I'm ok with it. Men have been getting the good end of sexual discrimination for centuries. Owning property. Voting. Higher education. Being allowed to practice a profession. Being favored by marriage laws. Being favored by social biases. Like Peter Parker and Voltaire say, "With great power comes great responsibility." Having received a substantial boost…
>Men have been getting the good end of sexual discrimination for centuries. Not really. Men have had more freedom but less security. Just because you personally like your gender role (as it seems), that doesn't mean other men agree (or agreed in the past). Sure, men were allowed to be employees and women cared for the children at home (though reality was actually a lot more complex than that, but we can accept this c…
This isn't true no matter how you slice it. Men had more economic security because they could work, whereas most women could not. Men have bodily security in ways women do not, esp. in regards to sexual assault and domestic violence.
> men had to work or they wouldn't find a women to marry
I think you have this backwards. Men didn't have to marry. However, since women at large could not work and support themselves, many had no choice but to be attached to someone who could work. Due to past stigmas about women were not married, this put women in a position where getting married was a near necessity.
> Women didn't have to work, as they could be supported by their husband.
Not only would women have little recourse but to marry someone, but women by far were expected to should domestic duties. That is a lot of work and is a full time job in and of itself.
> Of course, there's little proper scientific research on this subject, as "women's studies" start from their assumption that women had and have everything worse without really proving it.
This is blatantly not true. There is a ton of written and academic research work on gender, sexism, etc. and women's studies is a real academic discipline.
> The problem with saying that the men's gender role of more freedom but more responsibility doesn't take into consideration that some people prefer to have less freedom and less responsibility, while some women prefer to have more freedom and more responsibility and some less freedom and less responsibility (or at least prefered in the past).
Men are much more able to pursue the less freedom and less responsibility life, as you put it, compared to women because of how they are treated in society at large. Historically most women did not have the option for the less freedom and less responsible life since they would either be pigeonholed into domestic care or they would have been working poor.
> Even if we assume that men had better starting position in the past, that doesn't apply anymore. Young women are outearning and have more success in education.
This is plainly not true. Most women still earn less than their male counterparts. Further, women still suffer far more from domestic and sexual violence and have their bodies policed much more than men.
> True equality can only be reached through the abolition of gender roles for both men and women, not assuming that men need to "man up" and therefore saying that gender inequality is somehow positive and should exist.
Gender inequality exists right now, even without something like Lulu, and will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. Having an app that deals with one aspect of that reality is totally legit.
> You also made the claim about "imbalance". There's no imbalance in favor of women in Western countries.
Amazingly you say that there is no real research on women's studies, but then go on to conclude there is not problem at all.
> Men have just as much gender equality problems as women, but even speculating this is politically incorrect.
Ah yes, saying men have it as hard as women, which is demonstrably not true at a societal level, will summon the PC police.
> Here's a study o the subject: http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450
The summary of that study tries to use misandry and matriarchy seriously to describe the social and political condition of a western country. This is laughable on its face.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right here. Pissed off that this app exists. But recognizing that it's a lower priority than a heck of a lot of other things in our society. (I've got a top level post going into this in more detail.) Opposing this type of service looks to me like a classic part of feminism, no question. If you have specific evidence that "the feminists" do not oppose this sort of thing, now would be a great time to share.
Would like to read when you've posted it. Anywhere I can look for it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Men have had the upper hand since the dawn of existence and still have the upper hand in basically every society in the world.
Nope, men have the upper hand and lower hand, and if you take the average out of that then women are men are equal at least in all Western nations. Even though 60-80% of politicians may be male, that's contrasted with 80% of homeless people being male, 80% of suicides made by men. If we look at young people, then women clearly have the uppder hand. In addition to having the upper hand in dating, they out-earn young m…
Quey: how does the suicide give women an "uppper hand" this is a personal choice, and doesn't seem to be about gender equality at all. Sure you could say "men are more pressured..." but you could also say "women aren't empowered to make decisions about their body and don't see it as viable". Again: how does the stat show an upper hand?
About dating: I don't think you can declare women have the "upper hand". At best they have an "even hand". Sure there are pretty girls that get an absurde level of "power of choice", but there are plenty of men in the same category. Similarly when the traditional "men approach" role is taken, women are stuck with what comes their way. Putting it another way: in my experience the problems women experience in dating are the same as the problems men experience: shitty candidates, lots of fear of rejection, insecurity and incompatability issues. Leading to:
Query: how do women have the upper hand in dating in your mind?
I can't wait to see this buried beneath older stories with fewer points and comments, the way every story on sexism gets buried here. Oh wait this is about how awful women are to men. Never mind.
What are you talking about? I see at least a few stories per week on sexism in the top 10. Given that this place is more technology/startup-related than "let's talk about society", that's a pretty good frequency for just one of many valid social causes.