It Seems The Study Of Anthropology Makes Me A Misogynistic, Backwards Thinker.

[Paul Beardsley]

As a Man, I'm enraged that strangers won't pet my belly OR play with my hair. This is completely unfair, and I demand to be compensated.

This probably amused you when you wrote it but it trivialises the issue without actually being clever or funny.

[Perikles]

I have a serious question here. Throughout this thread, the theme has been misogyny, yet I see no trace of anybody actually disliking or hating women. What I do see are references to sexual discrimination, or references to lack of respect for one sex. Has the meaning of mysogyny moved on so that it now means just that?

[Gillianren]

Misogyny, to me at least, also encompasses a certain amount of sexism. Anything treating women as substantially lesser than men comes from a bad place, and I do think there's a certain amount of dislike of women implied in certain stereotypes. I read a book of the highlights of a hundred years' worth of Washington State political cartoons today, and there was one about how women were admitted into a flying school in the state in 1940 or something. Everything in the cartoon was trivializing of women as drivers and implying that certain behaviours would carry through to their flying. I'm sure if you asked the man who drew it, he would tell you that he didn't hate women. However, he certainly had disdain for them.

[Nicolas]

A cartoon based on a stereotype, who'd have thought...

What strikes me, is that overhere there are a lot of commercials using negative stereotypes about men (lazy, don't listen, can't do the household, can't take care of the kids, try DIY but fail...), and there never follows a complaint. When a commercial uses a negative stereotype about women, there are loads of complaints, they get banned... Even in the case of twin commercials. (in variant a the man does something stupid, in variant b the woman).

[Tog]

I had no idea, at least not to the extent you say it's going on.

I would never touch a pregnant woman without invitation, and I would probably decline to do so even if invited. Feeling a stranger's baby kick is not on my bucket list.

I've been aware of it for a long time. I spent a lot of time in a grocery store while living in a very family oriented state. I've seen people ask to touch a lot, but I don't recall more than a handful of invitations to do it.

I even included it in a story. My main character is missing a hand and is very self conscious about it. He's bothered by the fact that everyone feels it's okay to ask how he lost it, then compared it to how it must be for a pregnant woman to have strangers walk up and run their bellies.

[Buttercup]

A cartoon based on a stereotype, who'd have thought...

What strikes me, is that overhere there are a lot of commercials using negative stereotypes about men (lazy, don't listen, can't do the household, can't take care of the kids, try DIY but fail...), and there never follows a complaint. When a commercial uses a negative stereotype about women, there are loads of complaints, they get banned... Even in the case of twin commercials. (in variant a the man does something stupid, in variant b the woman).

My 2 cents' worth (usually avoid conversations like these like a plague)...

Stereotyping is wrong.

The outcry on the part of women is "simply" due to the fact that down through the centuries and around the globe (and currently in some places) women ARE systematically oppressed. Denied education, denied contraceptives, beaten or killed for not following society rules (or even if suspected/accused of not following the rules); and here in the West women are still not paid equally to men if doing the same job. We couldn't vote until the early 20th century, etc.

I can think of plenty of places in the world/in time that I, as a woman, would not care to live -- out of true fear for my safety and well-being. Even here I have to often be careful against being mugged, raped, attacked because I'm physically weaker.

We women deal with all sorts of issues you men don't have to. Be grateful.

[SeanF]

We women deal with all sorts of issues you men don't have to. Be grateful.

I actually am grateful, but I'd like to make a couple of comments.

First, men have to deal with issues which women don't, as well.

Second, keep in mind that both your statement which I just quoted and my complementary statement are, themselves, stereotyping men and women. Stereotypes are not necessarily untrue - in fact, the general truthfulness of a concept is often how it becomes a stereotype in the first place.

[Buttercup]

Misogyny, to me at least, also encompasses a certain amount of sexism. Anything treating women as substantially lesser than men comes from a bad place, and I do think there's a certain amount of dislike of women implied in certain stereotypes. I read a book of the highlights of a hundred years' worth of Washington State political cartoons today, and there was one about how women were admitted into a flying school in the state in 1940 or something. Everything in the cartoon was trivializing of women as drivers and implying that certain behaviours would carry through to their flying. I'm sure if you asked the man who drew it, he would tell you that he didn't hate women. However, he certainly had disdain for them.

Agreed, and it reminds me of a Christmas play husband and I saw years ago.

Joseph was portrayed as calm, clear-headed, patient, wise, long-suffering.

Mary (portrayed by a man) was portrayed as sniveling, clueless, complaining. She was so dumb she wasn't sure what her unborn would be named: "Hay-soos; or something like that."

And this was in an allegedly progressive church with women in positions of leadership (another reason I was shocked). If it hadn't been for in-laws also there, I'd have walked out.

That was misogynistic imo.

[whimsyfree]

You're extrapolations are writing checks your contextualization can't cash.

That doesn't mean anything to me. Perhaps what I wrote was unclear. I'll try again. Taken literally your statement didn't say anything interesting.

You're confusing third places and enclaves with isolated communities.[/QUOTE]

I didn't mention either in my post and neither did you. I feel you are misdirecting.

[Perikles]

Stereotyping is wrong. .

What @SeanF said. And this seems to be a very irregular verb:

I make constructive generalizations
You stereotype
He is a misogynist / she is a misandrist

<grin>

[Solfe]

Oh, just have to comment by stereotyping the entire board. There is little misogyny due to the brainy types on the board. It is hard to be smart and have a desire to anger people for no good reason. I guess it happens, but not all that often.

Stereotyping can get you in the proper mindset to deal with others with only a short and simple observation. If you take it any further, it is almost exactly like playing with a live hand grenade. I would say it is one of those tools, like fire and knives, that people misuse all of the time.

[Paul Beardsley]

I think the overuse of the term "misogyny" has made it the Godwin of gender debate, which is a shame, because genuine cases of misogyny need to be challenged.

Stereotypes... are we talking about generalisations which are untrue, or are we talking about generalisations which are observations based on data? "Men are taller than women" is an example of the latter. Most people know some women who are taller than some men, but it would be absurd to suggest that this proves the generalisation wrong. Yet there are very few other generalisations based on data that one can quote without getting an unreasonable response, as Don's anecdote illustrates.

Negative portrayals of men in the media... These are probably most hurtful to the kind of man who actually cares what women think.

Centuries of oppression of women... The men who get the message from the media that they are worthless are not the ones that did the oppressing. Striving for equality should not mean punishing an individual man for something his great grandfather might have done.

Denied contraceptives... Serious question (because I don't know the answer): who invented reliable and safe contraceptives? And safer methods of delivering children? I strongly suspect men were the main players in this, even if it was for the wrong reason (i.e. women weren't given the opportunities to become doctors and so on). Yes, men treated women pretty shabbily throughout history, but they also had a lot to do with the fact women and men have the free time to have a conversation like this with people from a diversity of continents and backgrounds.

[Buttercup]

Centuries of oppression of women... Striving for equality should not mean punishing an individual man for something his great grandfather might have done.

True.

And (speaking of here in the States) there are regional differences. Back home (Midwest) it's perfectly acceptable for a woman to be outgoing, friendly, extend a hand for a handshake (with either gender), etc. It's okay for her to approach a man.

Here, in the SW end of the Bible Belt? Anything but. I learned a long time ago (from both Hispanics and whites) that women don't extend a hand for a shake; it's odd. You don't approach a man unless it's business or a very good reason. The genders are mostly socially segregated, even in "relaxed" settings. If a woman is friendly/outgoing (I know this from personal experience) she's likely up to something (met with suspicion, and likely derision). However if she's quiet and keeps away from men (I now do -- for a long time), well that's no good either. Is she a snob? What's her problem? You're then approached and "checked out."

This goes on in 2012. If I'd known, prior to moving here, that this is the mentality? Regardless of race, educational levels, etc.? I'd have stayed in the Midwest.

And to think back home men and women chat, shake hands, mingle reasonably. It's okay. I sure miss that.

[Paul Beardsley]

Agreed, and it reminds me of a Christmas play husband and I saw years ago.

Joseph was portrayed as calm, clear-headed, patient, wise, long-suffering.

Mary (portrayed by a man) was portrayed as sniveling, clueless, complaining. She was so dumb she wasn't sure what her unborn would be named: "Hay-soos; or something like that."

And this was in an allegedly progressive church with women in positions of leadership (another reason I was shocked). If it hadn't been for in-laws also there, I'd have walked out.

That was misogynistic imo.

Does every female character have to represent every woman?

My objection to every advert since the early 1990s is that there was a strongly hinted, often overtly stated, message that all men are useless, socially inept, deserving of unprovoked attack* and so on. There was no suggestion of, "Some men are like this, but you could be better than that."

But surely it's possible to portray Mary as a bit dippy. Sure, if every female character was similarly portrayed, I'd see the problem, but this Mary was surely intended as a break from the traditional portrayal?


*I'm thinking of one in which a very sexy woman wearing a t-shirt with "Hello handsome!" on the front walks across a beach towards a young man who, let us say, probably hasn't had many girlfriends. She is deliberately giving him the impression that she is interested in him. Then she walks past him and he sees on the back of her t-shirt "Not you, bozzo!" Again, imagine that advert with the genders swapped.

[Solfe]

Stereotypes... are we talking about generalisations which are untrue, or are we talking about generalisations which are observations based on data?

I would say that most stereotypes fall in both categories.

I often tell a joke at school: "This must be a higher level course... people have bathed." My teachers laugh at this, the students don't.

I never wear button down shirts at school because I've been mistaken for a teacher on several occasions. This ALWAYS happens when I used the pencil sharpeners at the front of the room. My teacher(s) is(are) not amused by this, especially when the person making the mistake is another teacher or staff member. The implication being my teacher was replace by me, this replacement seems reasonable to them and the problem is amplified by the person actually ignoring the teacher who is present.

One day, a teacher and I watched a group of young men and women wearing "business, wicked-serious" attire hanging out in the hallway. We both assumed they were business mentors or visiting guests and tried to help them. It turns out they are a group of students that simply dress very nicely. They did it all semester long.

All of those are stereotypes about teachers and college students. They have to do with an observation being combined with a mental picture that goes wrong.

[Buttercup]

Does every female character have to represent every woman?

...But surely it's possible to portray Mary as a bit dippy. Sure, if every female character was similarly portrayed, I'd see the problem, but this Mary was surely intended as a break from the traditional portrayal?

My opinion? In a church setting (even if a "progressive" church) it was pandering to negatively ingrained stereotypes; the wife of Lot, Eve, etc. (Mods: I am not going further with that).

My main objection to Mary's portrayal in that skit was it being in stark contrast to Joseph. He's flawless and wonderful; she's the miserable dolt he's having to endure.

If they'd BOTH been presented as somewhat funny and somewhat straight-on, fine. But it was gross exaggeration; in his favor and against hers.

Especially as Mary having been mother of Jesus (especially to these folks)...it was shocking. And it takes a lot to shock me in those regards.

[Gillianren]

Negative portrayals of men in the media... These are probably most hurtful to the kind of man who actually cares what women think.

And I think they're wrong. On the other hand, I think there are more negative portrayals of women, and I think that most men don't even notice what's negative about some of them. Those women who are shown as being smarter and more attractive than their dumb husbands are also usually shown as being shrews. She's also often shown as being a trophy--isn't it great of him to have married someone like her? Even if she is a shrew, she's still hot, and isn't that what's important in a woman?

Centuries of oppression of women... The men who get the message from the media that they are worthless are not the ones that did the oppressing. Striving for equality should not mean punishing an individual man for something his great grandfather might have done.

No, but it does mean showing him what he's still doing. I have a good friend who thinks it's totally okay to post snide comments about, shall we say, where in her reproductive cycle his wife is on Facebook. To imply that any time she's upset about something, it's hormonal. His male friends think this is hi-larious. His female friends do not. This is because we know it's probably what those same males are thinking every time we are upset about something, even if it's perfectly legitimate to be upset in that situation. This friend would be shocked and probably hurt if I called him sexist, but how else would you define that behaviour?

Denied contraceptives... Serious question (because I don't know the answer): who invented reliable and safe contraceptives? And safer methods of delivering children? I strongly suspect men were the main players in this, even if it was for the wrong reason (i.e. women weren't given the opportunities to become doctors and so on). Yes, men treated women pretty shabbily throughout history, but they also had a lot to do with the fact women and men have the free time to have a conversation like this with people from a diversity of continents and backgrounds.

Safer methods of delivering children? Women. Midwives had known for a very long time that you shouldn't go from, say, autopsy to childbed without at least washing your hands and maybe changing your clothes. Women whose children were delivered by midwife before germ theory really took off were far less likely to die of it. Caesarian section is useful when there's something wrong, but most of the time, the old-fashioned way is safer and healthier. The men did most of the inventing of drugs, and believe me, I'm grateful, but most of the ways we've done childbirth wrong over the years have been developed by men. And, yes, men invented reliable contraceptives, and, yes, I'm grateful for that, too. That doesn't mean I'd like men treating it like their gift to women. After all, almost all reliable contraceptive methods still require the woman to do most of the work. You can argue that it's fair, because a child will be more her job, but it's also well known in the medical community that the average man has no interest in the kind of birth control women expect to take.

It's also worth noting that, for example, I just had to enter "Caesarian" into my spell check, because while it was perfectly willing to accept that I might want to use the word "Cartesian," it did not know this word that . . . for one, describes my own birth. A lot of the things which really bother me about being a woman in modern society are so casual in men that I don't think they even notice them, yet they define my place pretty rigidly. Less so than my mother's place was defined, but there are still girls today, lots of them, being taught that math and science aren't ladylike. Why do you think there are so many more men than women around here?

[Buttercup]

I have a good friend who thinks it's totally okay to post snide comments about, shall we say, where in her reproductive cycle his wife is on Facebook. To imply that any time she's upset about something, it's hormonal. His male friends think this is hi-larious. His female friends do not. This is because we know it's probably what those same males are thinking every time we are upset about something, even if it's perfectly legitimate to be upset in that situation.

Or if we're not upset.

I can count many a time when I've simply (online or in real life) stated an opinion or offered a comment, poised and calm, and some man somehow misconstrues it as "getting worked up" or "over-reacting."

Huh?

Who's over-reacting? If there's legit disagreement, just say so. Don't project.

That all has a cumulative effect. Not all men do that, but enough of it consistently met with wears on a person.

[Perikles]

On the other hand, I think there are more negative portrayals of women, and I think that most men don't even notice what's negative about some of them.

I have to agree, especially thriller type programs on TV when something frightening happens. It is immensly irritating to see that whilst men are doing constructive things to ward off the axe murderer or monster or whatever, women always get in the way, do a headless chicken dance and scream loudly. That's all they ever do. I've never seen one do anything constructive that I can think of, and I must have seen thousands of these kinds of programs. Since this kind of event almost never happens in real life, it's difficult to judge how realistic this portrayal is, but I would like to think it is a gross stereotype.

[Gillianren]

There's an anime of which I am inordinately fond--despite the fact that it seldom in so many words makes any sense--wherein one of the main characters is an intelligent young woman who also happens to be a karate champion. She's never the one to solve the mysteries, but neither are most of the characters, including the cops. She keeps her father from dissolving into a puddle of sake and his own filth. Manages the household expenses. All kinds of things. And she's afraid of ghosts to the point that it's actually debilitating on several occasions. There is no in-character reason for this, especially because every single case which might be supernatural turns out to be faked. It's almost as though she were a hyper-competent Shaggy from Scooby-Doo.

[caveman1917]

there are still girls today, lots of them, being taught that math and science aren't ladylike. Why do you think there are so many more men than women around here?

As opposed to all the boys who are congratulated for expressing an interest in say nursing? Being of only one gender it's natural that you or anyone else would only have personal experience of one side of that sort of stereotyping, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work both ways.

[Infinity Watcher]

May I ask which anime it is Gillianren? (I'm coming to the end of my collection and since you're the resident film buff your recommendations would be of great interest to me).

More on topic, I'll start with a disclaimer: nothing that follows is in anyway intended to be offensive but we're dealing with a topic that is potential minefield (add in the multicultural nature of BAUT/Cosmoquest... [great...now I have to learn a new name...] and the consequent linguistical differences and it gets even more problematic to state things in an unambiguous way).

I had a couple of interesting lectures on stereotyping back in the day, now this was about 5 years ago so I may be a bit hazy on the details, but one of the main points of the lecture was that everybody stereotypes, it's part of the pattern matching tendency of the human brain (yes the same bit that gives us pareidola and similar phenomena... that's the price we pay for not getting eaten by a predator out on the savannah unfortunately). However as a form of pattern matching it's prone to exactly the same flaws as any other bit of the human brain like confirmation bias, which makes stereotypes somewhat suspect to begin with. The other major problem with stereotyping comes from good old statistics: specifically it's the flaw of trying to apply statistics to too small a sample size: you can't apply a statistical calculation to one person or even a small group and if you try you get stupid or irrelevant answers (like the classic gag about the average family having 2.4 children: it doesn't make any sense if you tried to apply it literally to any one family) add the two up and stereotyping is an excellent way to get the wrong answer about anybody or any group.

Problems really start to arise, not when people stereotype per se... as I said: everyone does it a bit after all if I ask you to picture say a Hollywood Lead Actress (as a concept, rather than any specific actress) you can probably get an image in your head which may not bear any resemblance to any specific reality, the problem arises when people do it and either don't know or don't care that they're doing it: that's when you get the sort of stuff we've covered in the thread: the shrewish smart housewife, the complete idiot of a bloke who has to be bailed out of whatever hole he's currently dug himself into... to pick two from this thread, and *of course* we notice the ones that relate to ourselves more than to others, again that's only human (personally it's geek/nerd stereotyping that pushes my buttons but that's possibly a bit off topic) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be aware of those affecting others as well, so I think some of the guys are right in this thread when they've been saying "hold on a minute men are stereotyped too" but so are Gillianren, Buttercup and others in this thread (my apologies to those I haven't listed by name but I'm only skimming for names at the moment) when they say that stereotyping of women is a *really* big issue, and that due to the historical patriarchal bias in western civilization, and hence the media some of the female stereotypes are perhaps a bigger deal overall since they're more prevalent and possibly more damaging. I'm personally of the opinion that adding in a course on critical reasoning and common psychological traps (like stereotyping, confirmation bias etc.) ought to be added in to the school curriculum during the ages of compulsory education since I think for a lot of people it would potentially be a lot more useful than some of the more esoteric branches of existing "standard" school subjects. I think when I started posting this all of that was leading up to a nice conclusive point... but my brain has decided to go on holiday so I'll throw this up for comment/criticism/comic relief/other whilst I try and remember where I was going with it...

[Gillianren]

As opposed to all the boys who are congratulated for expressing an interest in say nursing? Being of only one gender it's natural that you or anyone else would only have personal experience of one side of that sort of stereotyping, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work both ways.

I've never said it doesn't. But women were encouraged to be nurses instead of being doctors; women have always been funneled into the subordinate position. Personally, I think they're both totally worthy professions of which I, for one, am incapable; nursing may well be harder than being a doctor. I don't think it's a job that gets enough respect. I also assume it's harder for male nurses than female ones because of some of the assumptions inherent in the attitudes toward the profession.

May I ask which anime it is Gillianren? (I'm coming to the end of my collection and since you're the resident film buff your recommendations would be of great interest to me).

In America, it's called Cased Closed, but the title more accurately translates to Detective Conan.

And you're right--the problem is not with stereotyping itself. The problem is when stereotypes have a negative influence on how people are being treated. I really do believe more negative stereotypes of women are harmful than those are men simply because men have more power in this society. Though I can also provide a list of negative stereotypes of men which I think are harmful.

[Paul Beardsley]

And I think they're wrong. On the other hand, I think there are more negative portrayals of women, and I think that most men don't even notice what's negative about some of them.

Now there's an interesting point. I have noticed what's negative about them, but I've always assumed that this is what the advert makers consider a win for the women. In my limited experience, I've got the impression that a lot of women agree - it's nice to hear one disagree.

Those women who are shown as being smarter and more attractive than their dumb husbands are also usually shown as being shrews. She's also often shown as being a trophy--isn't it great of him to have married someone like her? Even if she is a shrew, she's still hot, and isn't that what's important in a woman?

But the thing is, the man is frequently shown as not getting the hot woman. In one that springs to mind, a hot woman feeds the man various foods traditionally considered aphrodisiac. She nonverbally promises hm a very good time. She handcuffs him to the bed... and then leaves him. All because he borrowed her car without asking. In post 134 I gave the example of a hot woman leading on a vulnerable man simply because she could. The message that seems to be coming from these adverts, and a fair few other TV programmes, is that the thing that gives a woman the most pleasure is dumping or rejecting a man.

Then there are the "quit smoking" adverts. Men dress up in giant cigarette costumes, and women beat them up. The apparent message is that smoking is yet another male thing that females have to endure or fight, although the message I read into it is that the young woman in question is pretty stupid to have taken up smoking in the first place in this day and age.

No, but it does mean showing him what he's still doing. I have a good friend who thinks it's totally okay to post snide comments about, shall we say, where in her reproductive cycle his wife is on Facebook. To imply that any time she's upset about something, it's hormonal. His male friends think this is hi-larious. His female friends do not. This is because we know it's probably what those same males are thinking every time we are upset about something, even if it's perfectly legitimate to be upset in that situation. This friend would be shocked and probably hurt if I called him sexist, but how else would you define that behaviour?

Sometimes it is hormonal - a female boss once shouted and screamed at me because of a legitimate concern I'd raised - but except for obvious cases like this, I absolutely don't assume it. The example you give, while undoubtedly sexist, is other bad things too, such as invasion of privacy.

Safer methods of delivering children? Women. Midwives had known for a very long time that you shouldn't go from, say, autopsy to childbed without at least washing your hands and maybe changing your clothes. Women whose children were delivered by midwife before germ theory really took off were far less likely to die of it. Caesarian section is useful when there's something wrong, but most of the time, the old-fashioned way is safer and healthier. The men did most of the inventing of drugs, and believe me, I'm grateful, but most of the ways we've done childbirth wrong over the years have been developed by men.

Points taken, although I was also thinking of things like epidurals and ultrasound.

And, yes, men invented reliable contraceptives, and, yes, I'm grateful for that, too. That doesn't mean I'd like men treating it like their gift to women.

Now here is where I run into problems. It seems men can be blamed for making contraceptives unavailable, but can't take the credit for causing them to exist in the first place.

After all, almost all reliable contraceptive methods still require the woman to do most of the work. You can argue that it's fair, because a child will be more her job, but it's also well known in the medical community that the average man has no interest in the kind of birth control women expect to take.

I'm not going to argue that it's fair, I'm going to argue that it's sensible. If a woman really doesn't want to be pregnant, then the obvious solution is to ensure that she can't get pregnant. The alternative solution - to ensure that her man can't get her pregnant - has obvious problems.

It's also worth noting that, for example, I just had to enter "Caesarian" into my spell check, because while it was perfectly willing to accept that I might want to use the word "Cartesian," it did not know this word that . . . for one, describes my own birth.

It's spelt "caesarean".

[Paul Beardsley]

A lot of the things which really bother me about being a woman in modern society are so casual in men that I don't think they even notice them, yet they define my place pretty rigidly. Less so than my mother's place was defined, but there are still girls today, lots of them, being taught that math and science aren't ladylike. Why do you think there are so many more men than women around here?

After some musing, I thought I'd respond to this.

I've taught basic mathematics to a lot of adults, some young adults who had recently left school without any qualifications, others in their 30s and 40s who feel they need more of a grounding in order to progress in their careers and so on. I've also been a personal tutor to a few people - nearly all girls - who needed extra help in passing their mathematics examinations. The gender mix has been roughly even.

One of the first things I do with a new group or individual is invite them to talk about their experience of learning maths. The majority told me horror stories of impatient teachers, confusing delivery, undermined confidence, a succession of supply teachers who don't have a clue, and so on. Later in the course, many have commented, "If only I'd had a teacher like you when I was at school!" (To be fair, some of those terrible teachers might have shone if they'd been faced with a class of people who wanted to learn - and I'd probably have been a terrible teacher if I'd had to deal with constant discipline issues.)

But I've never once heard a female student say she was told maths wasn't ladylike.

I'm undecided on the reason why STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) is so male-dominated, but I tend to favour lack of interest on the part of girls in senior school. There have been some interesting studies on this, and initiatives to try and get more girls into STEM, but... well, I don't think all stereotypes are incorrect.

[korjik]

After some musing, I thought I'd respond to this.

I've taught basic mathematics to a lot of adults, some young adults who had recently left school without any qualifications, others in their 30s and 40s who feel they need more of a grounding in order to progress in their careers and so on. I've also been a personal tutor to a few people - nearly all girls - who needed extra help in passing their mathematics examinations. The gender mix has been roughly even.

One of the first things I do with a new group or individual is invite them to talk about their experience of learning maths. The majority told me horror stories of impatient teachers, confusing delivery, undermined confidence, a succession of supply teachers who don't have a clue, and so on. Later in the course, many have commented, "If only I'd had a teacher like you when I was at school!" (To be fair, some of those terrible teachers might have shone if they'd been faced with a class of people who wanted to learn - and I'd probably have been a terrible teacher if I'd had to deal with constant discipline issues.)

But I've never once heard a female student say she was told maths wasn't ladylike.

I'm undecided on the reason why STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) is so male-dominated, but I tend to favour lack of interest on the part of girls in senior school. There have been some interesting studies on this, and initiatives to try and get more girls into STEM, but... well, I don't think all stereotypes are incorrect.

You may have some selection bias there. If the girl sees 'ladylike' as important, that will tend to select them out of getting additional tutoring.

I do agree that it may not be simply 'unladylike' that gets women out of the harder (as in physics as opposed to sociology) sciences and engineering tho. My school experience was 80+% male in physics, but 80+% female in psychology. Seeing as both were as male dominated a century ago, there may be something other than bigotry or stereotyping that may be influencing the choice.

[Nicolas]

My 2 cents' worth (usually avoid conversations like these like a plague)...

Stereotyping is wrong.

The outcry on the part of women is "simply" due to the fact that down through the centuries and around the globe (and currently in some places) women ARE systematically oppressed. Denied education, denied contraceptives, beaten or killed for not following society rules (or even if suspected/accused of not following the rules); and here in the West women are still not paid equally to men if doing the same job. We couldn't vote until the early 20th century, etc.

I can think of plenty of places in the world/in time that I, as a woman, would not care to live -- out of true fear for my safety and well-being. Even here I have to often be careful against being mugged, raped, attacked because I'm physically weaker.

We women deal with all sorts of issues you men don't have to. Be grateful.

I don't see how that explains feeling a need to get a commercial banned in which a woman tries to hang a picture on the wall and ends up destroying the wall. Especially not if it is played alternatively with a man trying to boil and egg and ending up burning down the house.

I'm not blind for problems that women may encounter here and in other countries, in contrary. It's just that imho the women who get wound up over things like that would better spend their energy and focus the attention on the real problems they have. They want to be treated equally, but as soon as a commercial does exactly that, they (a small subgroup, far from all women luckily) show that they really don't want to be treated equally. Only when it suits them. If they were a bit more honest, they'd see the equal treatment in both commercials. (the quality and use of stereotype is another discussion). If they were really honest about their objectives, they'd try to get both commercials banned. If they would be a very rare breed of Awesome Feminist, they'd try to get only the male variant of the commercial banned. <wink>

[Perikles]

I'm undecided on the reason why STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) is so male-dominated, but I tend to favour lack of interest on the part of girls in senior school. There have been some interesting studies on this, and initiatives to try and get more girls into STEM, but... well, I don't think all stereotypes are incorrect.

The trouble with this kind of discussion is the fear of making some general statement which is perceived to be denigrating one sex, when really you are just rying to be objective. I shall risk stating the assertion that brain function in women is not quite the same as in men. Generally, women excel in some areas and men in others. This is how we have evolved as a species. Sexual equality cannot be simply about insisting that men and women have to be equally capable at everything, that is just nonsense. I am not surprised that some areas of study are male-dominated - why would you expect equal numbers?

Edit: That was not intended as a personal attack, just a general question.

[Paul Beardsley]

The trouble with this kind of discussion is the fear of making some general statement which is perceived to be denigrating one sex, when really you are just rying to be objective.

Yes. This is what depresses me so much about Don's opening anecdote. Imagine where our understanding of chemistry would be if people flew into a rage because someone said helium has more protons than hydrogen.

I shall risk stating the assertion that brain function in women is not quite the same as in men. Generally, women excel in some areas and men in others.

This is an objective fact, yet some people are very reluctant to accept it. Possibly because the statement is sometimes followed with, "So that is why a woman's place is in the kitchen whereas a man should be out having fun." Possibly because the things women are naturally good at are denigrated by men... or women. And vice versa. And so on.

And possibly because some people are wary of generalisations, even true ones, if they think they might be forced to conform to them.

This is how we have evolved as a species. Sexual equality cannot be simply about insisting that men and women have to be equally capable at everything, that is just nonsense. I am not surprised that some areas of study are male-dominated - why would you expect equal numbers?

Indeed. In fact, the very fact that men and women do seem to be equal in terms of intelligence is curious in its own right.

[Perikles]

Indeed. In fact, the very fact that men and women do seem to be equal in terms of intelligence is curious in its own right.

Perhaps that is due to the way in which intelligence is defined and measured, so by definition when defining all aspects of intelligence, men and women have to be the same on average. <scratching head/puzzled smiley>