Sexism, god help us (18 Viewers)

[Unicron]

Not even a little bit.

That's cool so. It's just a topic I've become a bit sensitive about in the past while, the go-to org for the media on adoption issues here are pretty bad for using language which marginalises adoptive families and whenever I hear their rep on the radio she says something that ticks me off, and I've been annoyed with them for more than a week now, which is a longer stretch than usual. So perhaps I jumped on your post heavier than I should have. Sorry bout that.

 

[Jim Daniels]

"gender" has turned into a fierce complicated word, and I've kinda lost track of what it means

This article offers an explanation on that, which I think is pretty good. Although, I'm not sure what it really adds to this thread. It is suggesting that society has the greatest impact on gender roles and positions.

What is the difference between sex and gender?

Sex = male and female

Gender = masculine and feminine

So in essence:

Sex refers to biological differences; chromosomes, hormonal profiles, internal and external sex organs.

Gender describes the characteristics that a society or culture delineates as masculine or feminine.

So while your sex as male or female is a biological fact that is the same in any culture, what that sex means in terms of your gender role as a 'man' or a 'woman' in society can be quite different cross culturally. These 'gender roles' have an impact on the health of the individual.

In sociological terms 'gender role' refers to the characteristics and behaviours that different cultures attribute to the sexes. What it means to be a 'real man' in any culture requires male sex plus what our various cultures define as masculine characteristics and behaviours, likewise a 'real woman' needs female sex and feminine characteristics. To summarise:

'man' = male sex+ masculine social role

(a 'real man', 'masculine' or 'manly')

'woman' = female sex + feminine social role

(a 'real woman', 'feminine' or 'womanly')

 

[jonah]

That's cool so. It's just a topic I've become a bit sensitive about in the past while, the go-to org for the media on adoption issues here are pretty bad for using language which marginalises adoptive families and whenever I hear their rep on the radio she says something that ticks me off, and I've been annoyed with them for more than a week now, which is a longer stretch than usual. So perhaps I jumped on your post heavier than I should have. Sorry bout that.

No I think you fairly pointed out something that I didn't really talk about, which is a 100% overlook on my part. I'm fully behind what you said.

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

Agreed, I'm sure that will be the thinking. But is that a fair prejudgement for women who don't plan on having kids? Or who plan on working just as hard as men to compensate for the time they might miss? Or who might be far more qualified for the job?

The idea that women can be pre-judged on the provision that they *might* get pregnant is incredulous and so limited to a very narrow understanding of the lives that women may choose to lead, especially in this day and age.

Well its not fair but its human nature, any given woman may or may not get pregnant, the employer doesn't know, what he/she does know is that her male counterpart definitely won't.

On maternity leave- would it be workable to give the couple a set amount of time to be divided as they see fit? So say 6 months, they could take 3 each or 4 and 2 or.... you get the idea.

 

[jonah]

Well its not fair but its human nature, any given woman may or may not get pregnant, the employer doesn't know, what he/she does know is that her male counterpart definitely won't.

On maternity leave- would it be workable to give the couple a set amount of time to be divided as they see fit? So say 6 months, they could take 3 each or 4 and 2 or.... you get the idea.

Yeah I think thats what they do in France and it seems like a good model.

I'm not sure how that works in single parent or alternative setup families?

 

[Unicron]

Well its not fair but its human nature, any given woman may or may not get pregnant, the employer doesn't know, what he/she does know is that her male counterpart definitely won't.

On maternity leave- would it be workable to give the couple a set amount of time to be divided as they see fit? So say 6 months, they could take 3 each or 4 and 2 or.... you get the idea.

That only seems like it might work if a couple had the same employer. I don't think reducing maternity leave is something that should be on the table, increasing paternity leave can be handled as a separate issue.

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

Yeah I think thats what they do in France and it seems like a good model.

I'm not sure how that works in single parent or alternative setup families?

I guess the single mother gets the lot? Other family types shouldn't really be a problem once the family type is recognised in law.

 

[тхеодоре кацзынски]

That only seems like it might work if a couple had the same employer. I don't think reducing maternity leave is something that should be on the table, increasing paternity leave can be handled as a separate issue.

I don't think there need be a common employer for it to work, the bigger problem might be with people trying to abuse the system.
I'm definitely not suggesting maternity leave be reduced although I guess it could appear that way.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Neither am I. There appears to be some confusion on that part.

 

[therealjohnny]

@billygannon posted a quotable quote on the idea of work and how we think of it on facebook recently

It was good

He should repost it here

 

[Squiggle]

Hmmm, I thought this thread was about women's sports and why nobody cares about them. My theory is that girls and young women who do like participating in sports are either actively discouraged or marginalised early on, and patronised to a point where they are almost ashamed to take part. And that girls and women who like watching sports encounter similar patronising attitudes. I've even encountered some here on the Six nations thread and in the past when I commented on F1 or other sports I enjoy as a spectator.

Regarding the birth/parenting comments of the last few pages and their impact on workplace promotional options etc... in Norway there is paid parental leave of 1 year after the birth, which can be divided between the parents however they see fit (they can both take 6 months consecutively or stagger it so that both work part time after a period of time).

Many women take years, not weeks or months, to recover fully from 9+ months of growing and carrying a baby and the physical, and sometimes emotional, trauma of giving birth, even in a straightforward birth situation.

But, regardless of the recovery time mothers need - babies need their mothers (and, in an ideal world their fathers too) and there is a growing body of evidence that not allowing them to bond properly with a parent (including adoptive) in the first 3 to 4 months can affect them negatively for the rest of their lives and has long term societal effects.

Infant stress (usually caused by being left to cry and not having needs met consistently) has been shown to cause permanent damage, high cortisol levels in infancy have been shown to permanently reduce oxitocin (the love hormone) and other feel-good hormone levels. Basically a stressed baby becomes a stressed adult, less able to relate to and bond with other humans and less capable of dealing with stresses that they encounter.

Not that being with their mother or father guarantees that they will be cared for responsively but it should be more likely that they will be than if they are left with more distant relatives or with strangers.

But this country generally cares less about children than it does about women.

 

[Squiggle]

I was just reading this the other day... it starts before we are even born Play Unlimited Giving birth to gender » Play Unlimited If I'd a Euro for everytime I was asked what I was having or what I wanted, or told that boys are this or girls that I wouldn't have to worry about parental leave, the glass ceiling or whether I was allowed to have an opinion on sport... I'd have so much money I could do what I liked.

 

[Lili Marlene]

But this country generally cares less about children than it does about women.

Could you explain a little more about how this is the case, it seems to come out of nowhere at the end of what you are writing.

 

[Squiggle]

Could you explain a little more about how this is the case, it seems to come out of nowhere at the end of what you are writing.

Because it is a whole new forum. Where women are not treated as equals, children are often not treated as autonomous humans.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Because it is a whole new forum. Where women are not treated as equals, children are often not treated as autonomous humans.

what is a whole new forum?

Sorry I'm clearly being slow today

 

[Squiggle]

A discussion of the legal rights of women and, even more so, children, and the manner in which they are treated by society as a whole would need its own forum.

 

[rettucs]

Many women take years, not weeks or months, to recover fully from 9+ months of growing and carrying a baby and the physical, and sometimes emotional, trauma of giving birth, even in a straightforward birth situation.

this. The whole 'length of paternity/maternity' leave debate took place here without people once mentioning how long it actually is, how long it actually should be, etc. I find that strange. As far as I know its 27 weeks minimum and there is an option (at an employers discretion) to take further unpaid/parental leave, which most people do avail of. I know my sister has had a couple of kids and she was out of work for the bulk of a year both times.

But on squiggles point above. Should there not be an element of 'need' about maternity leave? I'm not sure how it could be quantified but why 27 weeks when some people clearly need more and some people could clearly do with less?

If you were getting time off work for anything other medical related reason the length of time off would depend on your reason for needing it off in the first place (I'd advocate generous allowances in both instances).

I recall a while back a woman I worked with adopted a child. She was with the company less than a year at the time and apparently this meant there was no obligation on the company to give her paid 'adoptive maternity' (they had a different title for maternity leave in the case where you adopt). Thankfully the company were decent about it and she got the full allocation of leave (and subsequently decided not to return to work). The fact there was a chance she could have been denied this leave amazed me, and highlights the fact that the rules around maternity leave (not that I know them in detail) seem a bit made up.

And I'd say the same about paternity leave. One of my sister's kids had a very difficult birth and it required an emergency section. It took my sister quite a while to get over that and she would not have been able to cope with a newborn and a hyper 3-year old. So her husband ended up taking a couple of months of work (some paternity leave, some holidays, some unpaid). Again, why was the 'need' for extra leave not factored into things here?

 

[ann post]

Could you explain a little more about how this is the case, it seems to come out of nowhere at the end of what you are writing.

Legally the pattern in ireland was to leave children to be dealt with by parents i.e. no legal protection framework. This changed marginally with the childrens referendum but we are still kinda backward with the whole thing.

 

[Lili Marlene]

A discussion of the legal rights of women and, even more so, children, and the manner in which they are treated by society as a whole would need its own forum.

Legally the pattern in ireland was to leave children to be dealt with by parents i.e. no legal protection framework. This changed marginally with the childrens referendum but we are still kinda backward with the whole thing.

Danke. If only John Waters posted here...

 

[egg_]

My theory is that girls and young women who do like participating in sports are either actively discouraged or marginalised early on

Clearly this happened to you @Squiggle, but I'd be reluctant to generalise it as a girl/guy thing. I probably know a few more guys than girls who are sporty, but not that many more and I know way more men than women, on account of the nature of my job. Also your mid-teens have gotta be 20 years ago now, things have changed a fair bit since then (especially in the GAA)

Oh, one other thing - my daughters both do dancing and drama classes, and there are about 10 girls for every boy in those. You get similar ratios in dance classes for grown ups, come to think of it. Is that also part of the problem? Do you think all gender roles are harmful?