The boys club

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Zontar:
I think it's odd you assume that a society that would have such programs operating for about 30-40 years (depending on the specifics) would be one where we should assume everyone not raised by those raised in such a system are automatically sexist.

Well, I never really said that. I said that we cannot and should not consider a society perfectly egalitarian because they've had all of, what, a generation and a half of social programs aimed at advancing gender equality?

I also find it hard to believe that a system couldn't show any change after 30-40 years but somehow 60-70 year will, especially since the mentality behind the theory that drives it should have made a single decade be all it takes to at least show SOME change.

So did Norway just reach an egalitarian utopia in the 70s? Because that's the only way no change has been shown. Though you seem to have misunderstood the time table I was talking about. We're not talking about waiting another generation, we're talking about waiting until every generation born before the programs were put in place (or, since I imagine they've changed a bit over the decades, perfected) is gone. Everyone alive before the programs needs to be dead, along with their children. The grandchildren get to be the first ones to claim to be without the influence (and that's still being generous) of a sexist society.

Exactly, which is why the nature vs nurture debate still rages on despite the fact the very work that started it all proved is it nature, and all subsequent work that has survived the riggers of falsification and peer review have as well.

And all the advances made towards gender equality were, of course, the result of some weird mutation in women that made them become naturally capable of things they were just not before. Different societal ideas about gender and how children were raised and every other bit of the vast web of influences on children had no bearing on this development.

No this was the experiment where a pair of twin boys had one of them accidentally have his penis cut off, and the response by the doctor was to use him as a Guinea pig to prove that gender is socialized, which resulted in him giving him a sex change operation shortly after birth and his being raised as a girl while his brother was raised as a boy.

Despite the fact that he refused to be identified and treated as a girl by age 9 (without being told of his birth state initially), his depression over his forced body change and eventual suicide, somehow the complete failure of the experiment and the fact it proved that gender is nature, not socialized, it somehow sparked a debate on the matter and has led to people genuinely believing that gender is a social construct when all evidence shows it's hard-coded into us.

So because you can't lop off boys' penises and tell them they're a girl without some issues showing up, men and women are just hard coded to enter and excel at different jobs? All based on a sample size of one fucked up situation; the epitome of science that is.

Silverbeard:

Fiz_The_Toaster:
I.
That said, there are guys out there that do say something when someone is being a dick and saying some real sexist shit. Again, it's going to take some time, and it's going to be super painful. Also, I don't want for guys to interact with woman stiffly and feel like they have to censor themselves otherwise they get shit canned. If the woman on a job is okay with dirty jokes, tell them. If not, don't tell them when she's around. You know, common decency.

This does raise an obvious self-effacement: Specifically, how is one to know that a woman would be 'okay' with dirty jokes? I'd think that the only way to make a deduction would be to actually make a dirty joke and gauge the reaction- but by then the joke has already been made and if the woman in the example is not okay with such jokes then it's too late to take it back.
So... how is one to know?

In my own case for example, I work in a laboratory. Most of the women at my workplace are well-educated and many are much older/ have more field experience than I do. As a guy, I admit that I feel very uncomfortable talking with any of them. I feel like I need to constantly watch what I say or I'll end up annoying any number of them. I act much differently around the other guys at my lab; we'll routinely mock each other's appearance, job competency and indeed any number of things without a second thought and no-one holds even the slightest grudge.
I'm sure you'd think that I'm interacting stiffly with my female colleagues and I'll confess that that's probably true- but I don't know what else to say and I'd rather not stir anything up.

I don't know about your female co-workers, but I'm pretty up-front when it comes to dirty jokes and how I feel about them.

If I hear it and they stop telling the joke because I'm in the room then I tell them it's fine. At that point I make a joke about it, and ask them to carry on. Then again, I say very questionable things at times, so that's hardly an issue.

If it's in a lab and they are older, then maybe...? I would probably ask, honestly. If not, then I would just wait until one of them mentions it. Not ideal, but it's better than getting yelled at. Fucking women, why do they have to go make things difficult? :P

Redlin5:

I don't give a shit about the labeling, lets just acknowledge there's a problem.

That's usually the first point of contention.

Back in my electronics courses, we were taught things like "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls, But Violet Gives Willingly," a mnemonic for resistor colour codes. People get offended, even hostile when you suggest this sort of thing isn't particularly cool. Just stating that there's a problem in itself generates antipathy. Because really, what are electronics and engineering without rape mnemonics?

It's difficult to address a problem people won't admit exists.

Musou Tensei:
The only way to change that is to artificially suppress natural behaviours, which is very unhealthy and could lead to actual problems.

Yeah, except that's a pseudo-science argument that was used on blacks and gays, too. It sounds nice, except if it was nature, you would expect to see the same proclivities across cultures and time periods, you don't. It sounds nice, except we still actively discouraged girls from being assertive and rowdy. Except there wasn't an issue finding women in software and the like until they started actively precluding us. Except gender stereotypes change by the generation, and they're always somehow "natural."

It's the discouraging part that is against "nature." If you think that forcing people to act against their nature is harmful, then maybe don't do it. And don't support it.

LifeCharacter:

So because you can't lop off boys' penises and tell them they're a girl without some issues showing up, men and women are just hard coded to enter and excel at different jobs? All based on a sample size of one fucked up situation; the epitome of science that is.

It's also confusing "gender" and "gender identity."

Seriously, though, in pretty much every case where they've tried to raise a boy as a girl it's failed. this is still largely anecdotal, and with some really screwed up instances in terms of methodology, but we can't really test this on a wide scale without some ethical issues. But, I mean, you're talking to someone with gender dysphoria, and there are a bunch of others on here who could point to the fact that there is an issue when your gender identity doesn't match your body.

The pseudoscience, of course, is that if this is true it must extend to other elements. Like liking pink and cooking and...I don't know. My brother's "girlier" than I am, so stuff he does, I guess.

Zontar:

DementedSheep:
if they do get hired to met the "gender quota" all the men unfortunate enough to be saddled with them will have to pick up their slack.

That probably stems from the fact that having gender quotas does lead to people being hired because of their gender and not because of their abilities. Which is probably why when the EU tried to force a 40% corporate boardroom membership quota for women there was an outcry from women working in the industry. Which makes sense because if someone genuinely thinks you're an affirmative action hire being present not because of your abilities but because of what's between your legs you aren't going to be taken seriously.

The idea of gender equality is just nice lie that gets striped away the instant you get out of school.

I think you're mixing up "equality" with "parity". Having the same opportunities will not lead to the same results. There are things that women are inherently better at then men and things men are inherently better at then women, and we are hard wired to try to exploit these traits we have other the other due to the fact not doing so led to death before we created civilization (and even for thousands of years after we did so).

You'll be hard pressed to find a job that naturally gets a 50/50 split because with the way men and women think and what we take interest in you're unlikely to find anything that grabs our interest that works with our abilities equally on the societal level.

I also have to wonder where your little rant about men and women both seeing women as inherently inferior comes from, because it sure doesn't stem from prolonged periods in North American English or French society, or West European mainstream society either.

Have you lived my life? are you even female? no? then don't try and tell me what I have and have not experienced.
And gender quota was in qoutations marks because it doesn't mtter whether there was one or not. Thats the only way a lot of people can comprehend you even being hired

Redlin5:

120 students in first year, around 40 girls.

80 students in second year, about a dozen.

35 students in third year, 3 girls.

That's a loss of 85 males to 37 females.

Why did the guys drop? Not boy enough?

This is applicable to every single industry, hobby and community really. Everyone deserves to succeed based on merit and not feel they have to behave like someone they're not in order to hold a job.

I agree. Meritocracy = Best. However, I'd argue that everyone feels that way to a certain extent about any and every job they do. Hell, I do that every single day of my life because I'm not a people person, in the slightest, yet need to interact, pleasantly, on a daily basis in order to do my job (one I enjoy) effectively.

So...does this mean there are girls clubs too? Is that an issue as well?

I personally don't see a problem with either since, if you genuinely want to do a job you love, you suck it up and do what it takes to make that a reality.

Zontar:

Thats not an insult. At least, not to him. Sure, its infuriating but its not a personal attack on one's sense of self.

I have no idea what gave you that impression, but for heterosexual men attacking the women they care about is viewed as a worst slight then attacking they themselves is. It IS a personal attack on one's sense of self when that sense of self holds up that person higher then yourself. Men overall do not care what other men call them as insults unless it harms their reputation. What we do care about, however, is the women in our lives being insulted. A mother, wife or daughter being insulted are fighting words for many.

Family is a reflection of the self and vice versa.

It's not even an argument. It's an insult to him.

Zontar:

Redlin5:
I don't give a shit about the labeling, lets just acknowledge there's a problem.

Here's a fundamental problem with trying to 'solve' this, you're assuming there IS a problem. Is is actually a problem, are people legitimately being driven away because of how people inside already act, or are they simply choosing not to partake in this industry (you said it yourself that first year was 120 students down to 35 by third year. While 91% of women left so did 75% of men). And even if people who aren't of a certain mentality and/or fortitude aren't making it in, is that due to the fact there is a problem in not letting people without what is lacking in, or is it a key to succeeding in the industry?

I work summers in a factory processing turkeys. I work specifically in the slaughter section, where there isn't a single women to be found save federal inspectors who come by one every few hours. It's physically demanding work, it stinks and you have to deal with pretty ugly sights constantly. Not a single women has even APPLIED to try and work in the section for the past 4 years, and I'm the only student worker, male or otherwise, who didn't quit either in his first summer or simply not come back when the contract came to an end.

This is something that ticks me and everyone else in my section off. Whenever someone complains about there not being enough women in "X", it's always (unless being used as a point against such complains, or ironically) either a glamorous, idealized, or otherwise comfy job, typically high paying. It's never the low paying, gritty jobs that keep your food on your table, your lights on and you toilets running. These jobs are done to the near exclusivity by men, yet you don't see anyone seriously making complaints about that.

Here's the short of it if we're being honest, the Norwegian Paradox has long made clear men and women overall want to do different lines of work, and no ammount of programs for schools or affirmative action is going to change that. Men and women act differently, think differently, overall want to do different jobs and as a result overall do different jobs. It's hard coded into us to want to do different things, which is why you'll never have parity for the gender ratio in many lines of work. People can say it's a result of socialization, but as reality has shown over the past 50 years (and hell, the very unethical experiment which started the debate in the first place itself showed if one actually looks at its results) that is definitively not the case.

Basically every bit of this. These kind of "gender roles" can also be found in nature. I've seen studies done on chimps where they examine what activities and toys the males and females naturally choose. Funnily enough, it's virtually identical to that of human children in the western world: Boys like to play with cars and girls play with dolls. Hell, even some of the girl chimps made their own dolls out of sticks. Obviously humans will have a much wider variety of activities chosen among children, but these "gender inclinations", as it were, are a lot more ingrained that most might realize.

Don't forget that academia is also ridiculously corrupt with people desperately trying to push identity politics on their students.

If there exists an environment where a certain type of humor is expected, then i personally think that those who exist in the environment shouldn't have to cater to the sensibilities of others. I think if everyone had that mentality, the would would be a horrible place with no sense of intimacy anywhere.

LostGryphon:

Redlin5:

120 students in first year, around 40 girls.

80 students in second year, about a dozen.

35 students in third year, 3 girls.

That's a loss of 85 males to 37 females.

There is a smaller class size in the program as the years go on. Some of the girls and guys didn't place but a lot just didn't return for various reasons.

...as important a question to ask, I can't help but think this probably isn't the forum to be asking it, given we've already had the 'Women don't want certain jobs, it's not our fault' and 'It's only natural' arguments rear their ugly heads already. Good to see the usual excuses are trotted out despite a woman saying 'yeah it's a thing and it sucks' literally as the first reply.

But anyway. It's largely a result of weird cultural gendering that gets ingrained into things - i.e. why people find it strange when there's a female engineer or a male nurse (and why there's often mockery of those kinds of things), because over the years we've just ingrained assorted assumptions about 'which gender should play which role' out of an assortment of shitty reasons. It sucks and it's hard as hell to shift people out of that kind of thinking, since it's not really something people actually... think about. They just kinda go with it because it's what they've grown up with, and people suck at addressing their own biases.

To answer your question though... well, just include them. Don't make weird gendered assumptions about them, and call people out who try and pull that shit. Encourage people to stop thinking about people as 'That gendered role' and just as 'that role'. So instead of 'that female director' she's just 'the director'. Treat people with respect, and don't treat women with kids gloves to make them feel 'welcome'. Just treat them as people, and support them as you would any other co-worker.

As Fiz said in the first response, it's a long and painful transition. My advice is, as a man to other men? Be the change, support your female co-workers, call your male co-workers on any sexist/racist bullshit they try to pull and generally just try and encourage a shift towards respecting everyone for their ability rather than making weird assumptions about peoples gender.

9tailedflame:
If there exists an environment where a certain type of humor is expected, then i personally think that those who exist in the environment shouldn't have to cater to the sensibilities of others. I think if everyone had that mentality, the would would be a horrible place with no sense of intimacy anywhere.

...the thing is, is it really humour? I'm a gay man, and I've had numerous work places where other employees have made gay 'jokes'. Except they're not jokes, they're either broad-brushed harmful stereotypes or slapping 'gay' onto something and complaining about it being broken as a result. Like... if that's the standard of humour you're wanting to preserve in the workplace, you have some pretty low standards.

And I like gay jokes. I love 'em to death. They can be light-hearted, they can be dark, they can be rude and crude, whatever, I'm down with it. Just... include me in the joke. Don't make jokes about stereotypes or shitty assumptions, make some real proper gay jokes! Trust me, it's so much better to make a joke that actually includes gay people than just throwing out a 'lol homosexuals'. And if educating yourself on some good quality gay humour isn't up your alley - then just don't make 'em! Simple as that, don't make shitty jokes about a subject you know nothing about, make shitty jokes about things you're educated in (like, say, shit everyone at the job has to deal with), that'll go over much, much better than low-quality humour around terrible stereotypes.

In my personal experience, calling people on their lack of thought in regards to jokes doesn't result in some warped, horrible place where everyone treads on eggshells and there's no sense of community. It often results in them going 'oh, shit, really?' because they just never thought what they were saying was negative, and then putting in the effort to stop doing that and include me on the joke. No drama, no 'woe be to the office', just a moment of me going 'Hey, mate, could you not? I'm quite gay' and then them going 'Oh, shit, my bad mate' and it's all hunky-dory.

Granted, I could just be lucky since I've heard some horror stories from some fellow gay/lesbian friends in this regard and getting an overly dramatic response from whomever they're asking (people often assume 'what you're saying is hurtful' actually means 'You're a sexist, homophobic prick', which is dumb), but still. Going 'Uggh people not wanting to be made fun of by the expected humour is going to ruin the sense of intimacy in the workplace' is just... well, wrong. It isn't a bad thing to want to be included in the workplace humour, and it'd serve people a hell of a lot more if they actually included the 'others' rather than making fun of 'em.

Well I see the lady-issues are alive and well. Jesus christ dudes. Just.... fuckin' yikes.

OT: There's tons of reasons women don't feel welcome in male-dominated environments. It can be big things like a dude flat out telling you you don't belong there or little things like the guys around you constantly making jokes like 'hurr hurr woman interested in [x]'.
And an environment where people seem to have zero empathy or even misplaced anger towards women due to their own baggage.

I just recently completed a degree in IT networking that included the Microsoft MCSE and Cisco CCNA exams. I was getting an average of 90% in all the exams - I will point out, they're pretty easy, it's not like I'm a super genius or anything - and I got called into the Head of Department's office for an interview, where they asked me all sorts of questions to test my knowledge. I'd apparently been flagged as a cheating risk because my scores were high and I was female, so they made me resit one of the exams privately under the supervision of like five staff members staring directly at me the whole time. (I actually did better, because by that time I'd seen my results and figured out the things I had misunderstood the first time.)

If this is an indication of how my career in IT is going to be going forward, I'm dreading it, despite the fact that I love the subject.

People who deny that boys' clubs exist confuse me.

I think I'll add to this discussion something I think is interesting whenever I read about how gender discrimination does/does not exist in certain industries.
In America 14.5% of the adult male population is over 6 foot. 3.9% of the population in over 6 foot two.
According to Malcolm Gladwell in his book blink (a book about what he calls "unconscious prejudice") in Fortune 500 companies 58% of CEO's are over 6 foot. The number of CEO's over 6 foot two was 30%.
Gladwell specifically points out that there are rational reasons behind why women and minorities aren't in higher and that the board of directors can plausibly say "There aren't a lot of X in management positions, so of course a white male would be more likely t get the position". He goes on to say that the same cannot be said of short people and that while no-one ever dismissively says "He's too short" of a CEO candidate that doesn't mean that people don't unknowingly place bias against them on the basis of taller men being more "imposing".
Also according to Gladwell, a group of researchers (irritatingly, the piece I've found doesn't say which group) went back and looked at "four large research studies, that had followed thousands of people from birth to adulthood, and calculated that when corrected for variables like age and gender and weight, an inch of height is worth $789 a year in salary. That means that a person who is six feet tall, but who is otherwise identical to someone who is five foot five, will make on average $5,525 more per year."

It's kind of funny how the world works. What confuses me more is that it's not like various industries aren't filled with complaints from people who've left over feeling "unwelcome", so it seems odd to just dismiss those. The Trans perspective others have posted was very interesting, never considered it from that perspective.

KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime:

This isn't just a case of lack of interest, or difficulty of the job, it's a hostile environment. Plain and simple, if it wasn't there'd be more women to start and more would stick with the program.

Basically this:

This is a pretty bold statement. Do you have any statistically significant evidence that indicates that this is the case already at the choice of education? You are right that in the business there's a lot of sexism and there is indeed problems with work environment, but there are also gender related differences at an earlier point related to our neurobiology. Female brain development is more synchronized than male brain development so the brain halves aren't as radically different as they are in males. Now what does this mean? Well, girls will (on average) be better at communication at a young age. This makes them more suited for school than boys at the same age. In Norway this presents itself quite clearly in a few fields of education. Odontology, medicine and law studies are heavily dominated by female students. Physics, maths and IT on the other hand are heavily dominated by men still. It's actually reached a point where they considered giving boys extra credits to increase their chances of being accepted, which is stupid since we should strive for gender equality. (Source in Norwegian http://www.nrk.no/norge/jentene-tar-over-prestisjestudiene-1.11866832 )

So I am not claiming in any way that women shy away from challenges, statistics indicate the opposite. I am claiming that it runs deep. Hostile environment is probably one of the reasons why so many girls drop out or don't stay in their line or work or dislike their jobs, but in picking their education? I would need some evidence to support that. Doesn't have to be more than a survey, I'm just genuinely curious.

Something Amyss:

Redlin5:

I don't give a shit about the labeling, lets just acknowledge there's a problem.

That's usually the first point of contention.

Back in my electronics courses, we were taught things like "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls, But Violet Gives Willingly," a mnemonic for resistor colour codes. People get offended, even hostile when you suggest this sort of thing isn't particularly cool.

Actually, about that mnemonic.

It seems like the only kind of "Teach men not to rape", that doesn't assume all men are rapists.

I mean it literally says that only Arseholes rape.

Redlin5:

This is applicable to every single industry, hobby and community really. Everyone deserves to succeed based on merit and not feel they have to behave like someone they're not in order to hold a job.

Okay, I'll entertain this thought. I study engineering, land surveying to be precise, and am graduating this spring. I've worked at 2 different field-related jobs during my studies. Out of my initial class's around 40 students, less than 10 were girls. Now there are 6 left. In all this time I've heard exactly one instance of, admittedly, incredibly crass sexism. And that's it. None more. Nada. Not in school, no from my teachers, not on the job, not anywhere. The field holds no requirements that would call for one gender specifically, like demanding lots of physical strength. There has been no exclusion of the women in our class on group projects and such. And yet, you could still take a look at the numbers and say "there's not enough gender representation" or "land surveying is a boys' club", which is actually generally still said about any engineering fields.

Have you asked any of the women who quit their studies why they did it? Because making assumptions isn't cutting it. I'm not one to say it isn't possibly the climate in your studies, but is it really so bad as to be the primary reason for leaving studies, ones which they must have had at least some passion for? Not because they felt their interest fade away? Not personal issues? Not frustration over the teachers, or the quality of the education they were getting?

Numbers don't mean shit. Look at the gender ratios of fields like child care, education and nursing, and tell me there's not a gross imbalance there. And yet, do you hear someone saying nursing is a "girls' club"?

Redlin5:

How do you include women into the discussions and creative process without them feeling they have to 'become one of the boys' to do it?

I dunno, you tell me. Why would the women need to "become one of the boys"? I don't know what camera operation studies are like. What kind of aspects are there related to the job (note: the job, not your studies climate) that would drive this kind of process?

And yet, do you hear someone saying nursing is a "girls' club"?

I've heard people say that, yes.

NPC009:

And yet, do you hear someone saying nursing is a "girls' club"?

I've heard people say that, yes.

Likewise, when I was doing my Library Technician training, we were told there was a push to get more men involved in the library system, as it was seen as a female occupation.

I've worked in a field where the split in a 60 person building was about 80% women. On my team, I was the only guy out of 16 people.

Unsurprisingly, I left.

The only thing I had in common with any of them there was mutual attraction, which isn't the best idea in an office.

I don't blame them, not their fault.

I see no other way it could've ended unless they'd hired a whole group of other guys as well when they hired me, which would've still been risky and also probably sexist.

Mod Voice

NPC009:

NPC009:

Also, you know what? Fuck you.
[...]
To throw in another 'Fuck You' just because I can
[...]
(Probably going to get a warning for this, but right now, I don't care. If I survived the GID forum with a clean record, I'm sure I'll be back to zero soon enough.)

I really didn't want to have to do anything about this post, I mean most of it was fine. Perhaps even insightful. I was reading it not because it had been reported but because I was interested in the discussion. - I was having a similar talk with one of my colleagues at work recently and he was saying how he found it quite awkward to be around women because he consciously had to restrain the stories and jokes that he told. He's not overtly sexist, he just enjoys toilet humour from time to time. And I was saying how I didn't generally find those jokes very clever, and we got to talking about how humour when he grew up was different (at least in the UK.)

Interesting discussion.

But... yeah. I understand that it's a difficult discussion to have, and the nature of the discussion means some people are going to get pissed off, but...

-sigh-

That you seemingly look on receiving grace as an excuse to do as you will just makes things worse. I fear if I don't do anything about it, or impose some warning that you've already said you're fine with, you're just going to see that as an endorsement of your actions or as weakness on my part.

:/

You knew what you were doing, you knew it would be frowned upon, and you did it anyway in the expectation that you'd be able to get away with it because people would make allowances.

Please don't do this again when you get back.

Phasmal:

And an environment where people seem to have zero empathy or even misplaced anger towards women due to their own baggage.

And if you have an issue with it, it must be a "girl thing."

Which is totally not indicative of the issue.

OP- that's what the numbers were like, proportionally, when I was doing CS. The difference was, the girls were already split into smaller groups based on who they knew when they started, and joined up with groups of the guys from there. There were no problems getting along and there was none of this "one of the guys" bullshit. A couple of us even ended up dating someone from our respective groups over the time of the course.

By the second year a girl from each group had changed course or left because they realised they didn't want to do CS or uni (guys also dropped out or switched for the same reasons), and we all remained separated in different groups. The only time we ever worked together was when somehow 4 of us were put in the same group for a project.

If there is a need for better representation in areas where one gender or group is under-represented (e.g. women in tech, manual labour etc. Men in teaching, nursing etc.) the change needs to start with school. Encourage kids when they show an interest in a subject or field one wouldn't normally expect them to be interested in. No indoctrination, just don't hamper kids based on some silly expectations.

Wrex Brogan:
...as important a question to ask, I can't help but think this probably isn't the forum to be asking it, given we've already had the 'Women don't want certain jobs, it's not our fault' and 'It's only natural' arguments rear their ugly heads already. Good to see the usual excuses are trotted out despite a woman saying 'yeah it's a thing and it sucks' literally as the first reply.

But anyway. It's largely a result of weird cultural gendering that gets ingrained into things - i.e. why people find it strange when there's a female engineer or a male nurse (and why there's often mockery of those kinds of things), because over the years we've just ingrained assorted assumptions about 'which gender should play which role' out of an assortment of shitty reasons. It sucks and it's hard as hell to shift people out of that kind of thinking, since it's not really something people actually... think about. They just kinda go with it because it's what they've grown up with, and people suck at addressing their own biases.

To answer your question though... well, just include them. Don't make weird gendered assumptions about them, and call people out who try and pull that shit. Encourage people to stop thinking about people as 'That gendered role' and just as 'that role'. So instead of 'that female director' she's just 'the director'. Treat people with respect, and don't treat women with kids gloves to make them feel 'welcome'. Just treat them as people, and support them as you would any other co-worker.

As Fiz said in the first response, it's a long and painful transition. My advice is, as a man to other men? Be the change, support your female co-workers, call your male co-workers on any sexist/racist bullshit they try to pull and generally just try and encourage a shift towards respecting everyone for their ability rather than making weird assumptions about peoples gender.

9tailedflame:
If there exists an environment where a certain type of humor is expected, then i personally think that those who exist in the environment shouldn't have to cater to the sensibilities of others. I think if everyone had that mentality, the would would be a horrible place with no sense of intimacy anywhere.

...the thing is, is it really humour? I'm a gay man, and I've had numerous work places where other employees have made gay 'jokes'. Except they're not jokes, they're either broad-brushed harmful stereotypes or slapping 'gay' onto something and complaining about it being broken as a result. Like... if that's the standard of humour you're wanting to preserve in the workplace, you have some pretty low standards.

And I like gay jokes. I love 'em to death. They can be light-hearted, they can be dark, they can be rude and crude, whatever, I'm down with it. Just... include me in the joke. Don't make jokes about stereotypes or shitty assumptions, make some real proper gay jokes! Trust me, it's so much better to make a joke that actually includes gay people than just throwing out a 'lol homosexuals'. And if educating yourself on some good quality gay humour isn't up your alley - then just don't make 'em! Simple as that, don't make shitty jokes about a subject you know nothing about, make shitty jokes about things you're educated in (like, say, shit everyone at the job has to deal with), that'll go over much, much better than low-quality humour around terrible stereotypes.

In my personal experience, calling people on their lack of thought in regards to jokes doesn't result in some warped, horrible place where everyone treads on eggshells and there's no sense of community. It often results in them going 'oh, shit, really?' because they just never thought what they were saying was negative, and then putting in the effort to stop doing that and include me on the joke. No drama, no 'woe be to the office', just a moment of me going 'Hey, mate, could you not? I'm quite gay' and then them going 'Oh, shit, my bad mate' and it's all hunky-dory.

Granted, I could just be lucky since I've heard some horror stories from some fellow gay/lesbian friends in this regard and getting an overly dramatic response from whomever they're asking (people often assume 'what you're saying is hurtful' actually means 'You're a sexist, homophobic prick', which is dumb), but still. Going 'Uggh people not wanting to be made fun of by the expected humour is going to ruin the sense of intimacy in the workplace' is just... well, wrong. It isn't a bad thing to want to be included in the workplace humour, and it'd serve people a hell of a lot more if they actually included the 'others' rather than making fun of 'em.

Oh sure, there's a difference between harassment and humor, i guess the picture i had in my head was of people having a light-hearted but offensive joke to each other, and some sensitive newcomer overhearing it and getting offended. I guess it sometimes seems like some people want the whole world to have the same social dynamics, and i'm opposed to that concept, but i agree with the stuff you're saying. There's a difference between telling someone something they might not have realized was hurting you and taking offense to something that never involved you in any way and going straight to the managers or boss or whathaveyou without talking to the person.

I don't think I have much experience in this field, as I'm an English major and that's not really boy's club territory. I'm just saying that a lot of women have issues with this kind of crap, and I don't think they're all lying/misrepresenting their situations.

Its interesting how this also goes over to media. Like look at the new mlp and the hate it got when it was getting popular. It wasn't because it was a kids show, if it was then no one would be this nostalgic over transformers. It was because it was a 'girl' show and everyone knows girls don't like good things. >.>

Redlin5:

LostGryphon:

Redlin5:

120 students in first year, around 40 girls.

80 students in second year, about a dozen.

35 students in third year, 3 girls.

That's a loss of 85 males to 37 females.

There is a smaller class size in the program as the years go on. Some of the girls and guys didn't place but a lot just didn't return for various reasons.

Mm. Not sure why I had it in my head that it was X males to Y females, rather than total students.

Regardless, still a 48-37 differential.

And "various reasons" isn't really grounds to enact social change, dude.

Cadi:

If there is a need for better representation in areas where one gender or group is under-represented (e.g. women in tech, manual labour etc. Men in teaching, nursing etc.) the change needs to start with school. Encourage kids when they show an interest in a subject or field one wouldn't normally expect them to be interested in. No indoctrination, just don't hamper kids based on some silly expectations.

Right there with this. Encouragement is always good.

Fiz_The_Toaster:
I really think that this is going to be a long and painful process before this stops being a problem.

For some reason, some guys feel very weird about the fact that a woman is in their field and doing stuff with them. I understand that it's been a "boy's club" for a long time, but times have changed and they really need to stop making it harder on everyone.

I know for me, I'm really used to being the only girl in a tech crew for sound. I'm used to hearing dirty jokes that it really doesn't bother me anymore, and honestly I think a good chunk of them are funny. I mean, I'm not opposed to a good dick joke.

I know a few times I've been mistaken for the girlfriend of someone in the band, and then watch as they trip over themselves apologizing.

I don't think I'd call it the "last vestige of male productivity", but some times I think it is given how unwelcomed I've felt at gigs. It's really stupid. I have some horror stories.

That said, there are guys out there that do say something when someone is being a dick and saying some real sexist shit. Again, it's going to take some time, and it's going to be super painful. Also, I don't want for guys to interact with woman stiffly and feel like they have to censor themselves otherwise they get shit canned. If the woman on a job is okay with dirty jokes, tell them. If not, don't tell them when she's around. You know, common decency.

I view it as if someone doesn't like it when you smoke around them, you don't. It's also about not being a dick and for some reason it's "okay" when it's something like this. Unfortunately, I've had to work hard to get into the "boy's club", and it's dumb that I know I'm not the only one. I'd like to think that one day we'd all wake up and start treating each other with respect, but then again I'd also like to wake up one day and see a husky pouring a proper Guinness at my beck and call.

So yeah, it's slowly happening, but it's going to get worse before it gets any better. Thankfully, there are dudes that are trying to help out. So, yay! :D

Well, its not a husky but he poured you a beer.

image

Worgen:
Its interesting how this also goes over to media. Like look at the new mlp and the hate it got when it was getting popular. It wasn't because it was a kids show, if it was then no one would be this nostalgic over transformers. It was because it was a 'girl' show and everyone knows girls don't like good things. >.>

And let's not forget that when people did start liking it, they said things like "And they say that this show was for little girls." Uh, it was. It's a really good show for little girls, but it its target audience was for little girls. That seems to be the method. Girls only like crap things, and when they like good things, it's really for boys.

9tailedflame:

Oh sure, there's a difference between harassment and humor, i guess the picture i had in my head was of people having a light-hearted but offensive joke to each other, and some sensitive newcomer overhearing it and getting offended. I guess it sometimes seems like some people want the whole world to have the same social dynamics, and i'm opposed to that concept, but i agree with the stuff you're saying. There's a difference between telling someone something they might not have realized was hurting you and taking offense to something that never involved you in any way and going straight to the managers or boss or whathaveyou without talking to the person.

But Brogan is right. A large portion of this "humour" is simply "lolhomoslur."

Kind of weird that we just had this thread where people complained about how offensive the word "cisgender" was and we're already back to the notion that women and minorities should take a joke, though. If someone were to be making jokes about "straight people humour," or "cis humour" I imagine there'd be a very, very different conversation going on.

Wrex Brogan:
...as important a question to ask, I can't help but think this probably isn't the forum to be asking it, given we've already had the 'Women don't want certain jobs, it's not our fault' and 'It's only natural' arguments rear their ugly heads already. Good to see the usual excuses are trotted out despite a woman saying 'yeah it's a thing and it sucks' literally as the first reply.

It's even more baffling because if someone are "naturally inclined" to not take certain jobs, or just don't want them, why do so many women go into school or training for said jobs. Is it like the 80s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles series, where they forgot they were turtles? Do people think they go into these courses, then some programming trips in their head and it's like "oh shit, I forgot, I'm a chick! I hate this stuff!"

Why do women have to be told so frequently what they "don't like" or "don't want" to do? I would think if there was a legitimate natural disinclination, or a legitimate disinterest, it wouldn't need to be so constantly and thoroughly reinforced. I'm reminded of a certain YouTube personality who claims men are naturally more assertive and aggressive, but has repeatedly said he and his girlfriend are trying to break her daughter of the habit of "bossing" people around. I mean, doesn't that little girl know she's naturally less assertive?

Worgen:
Its interesting how this also goes over to media. Like look at the new mlp and the hate it got when it was getting popular. It wasn't because it was a kids show, if it was then no one would be this nostalgic over transformers. It was because it was a 'girl' show and everyone knows girls don't like good things. >.>

????

I'm pretty sure "the media" being shocked that MLP has a big 30-year-old-male audience is less about it being a bad show and more about it being a very childish, whimsical show about unicorns in shades of pink.

erttheking:

Worgen:
Its interesting how this also goes over to media. Like look at the new mlp and the hate it got when it was getting popular. It wasn't because it was a kids show, if it was then no one would be this nostalgic over transformers. It was because it was a 'girl' show and everyone knows girls don't like good things. >.>

And let's not forget that when people did start liking it, they said things like "And they say that this show was for little girls." Uh, it was. It's a really good show for little girls, but it its target audience was for little girls. That seems to be the method. Girls only like crap things, and when they like good things, it's really for boys.

And boys who like it are called demeaning slurs because it's a show for little girls. And considering how many of those "demeaning" things are feminine/female....

s0denone:

Worgen:
Its interesting how this also goes over to media. Like look at the new mlp and the hate it got when it was getting popular. It wasn't because it was a kids show, if it was then no one would be this nostalgic over transformers. It was because it was a 'girl' show and everyone knows girls don't like good things. >.>

????

I'm pretty sure "the media" being shocked that MLP has a big 30-year-old-male audience is less about it being a bad show and more about it being a very childish, whimsical show about unicorns in shades of pink.

Yeah, that's what I said, a show for girls. We don't see the media being surprised by 30 year olds liking transformers, which is pretty much aimed at the same age range. Because we as a culture tend view boys media as good media and girls media as throw away trash media.

s0denone:

I'm pretty sure "the media" being shocked that MLP has a big 30-year-old-male audience is less about it being a bad show and more about it being a very childish, whimsical show about unicorns in shades of pink.

Plus the real hate came from not men liking the show but the way those men acted. No one would care if guys liked the show, it wouldn't be the first time a significant number of men liked a show targetted to women or vice versa, but the way those fans acted online made it one of the most hated fandoms for a reason.

Thankfully they've reigned it in, but the initial 6 months after the show got popular with guys was hell on image boards and social media.

Worgen:

Yeah, that's what I said, a show for girls. We don't see the media being surprised by 30 year olds liking transformers, which is pretty much aimed at the same age range. Because we as a culture tend view boys media as good media and girls media as throw away trash media.

Transformers is a terrible example though, since 30 year olds are not only likely to watch such a show because the show has content aimed at boys, but because they likely watched one of the many previous series that have been made over the past 30 years.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked