Why are there so many posts about

[Marenta]

Why are there so many posts about women?

I suppose if I ever needed relationship advice about men, I could come and ask here...

 

[Evo]

Why are there so many posts about women?

The forum is mostly male.

 

[Marenta]

The forum is mostly male.

I've noticed, scary.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

I've noticed, scary.

why D:

 

[zoobyshoe]

I've noticed, scary.

It's not a male design, if that is what seems scary. Women seem naturally to have less interest in math and physics. The men who do are not particularly happy about that.

 

[Marenta]

It's not a male design, if that is what seems scary.

Or, I could have meant that it is scary due to the fact that I know oodles of female science/math lovers; however, it had occurred to me that while they are out there, they tend to not flaunt the fact they're female and they don't travel cyberspace all that often to find conversation. I, myself, only found this forum because I was looking for something in particular related to NPTU and just happened to stumble across it. I decided it was interesting enough and joined.

I suppose though, that the forums (or blogs, or newsletters, or whathaveyou) for SWE are chalk FULL of women.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Or, I could have meant that it is scary due to the fact that I know oodles of female science/math lovers; however, it had occurred to me that while they are out there, they tend to not flaunt the fact they're female and they don't travel cyberspace all that often to find conversation. I, myself, only found this forum because I was looking for something in particular related to NPTU and just happened to stumble across it. I decided it was interesting enough and joined.

I suppose though, that the forums (or blogs, or newsletters, or whathaveyou) for SWE are chalk FULL of women.

It's all about the ratio. Apparently there is always a higher proportion of men in math/science classes. For every unit oodle of women in math/science it seems there may be as much as an oodle² of men, though I don't know why.

 

[Marenta]

The debate about the men-to-women ratio in any sort of technical field has been ongoing since they allowed women higher education.

I will note that all of my math teachers in college were women, my chemistry teacher was female, and only my physics instructor was male.

 

[Pengwuino]

According to a statistically significant number of cartoons, 99.9% of men in scientific fields have no social intelligence when it comes to dealing with the opposite sex. Thus, they turn to the internet for help

 

[zoobyshoe]

The debate about the men-to-women ratio in any sort of technical field has been ongoing since they allowed women higher education.

I will note that all of my math teachers in college were women, my chemistry teacher was female, and only my physics instructor was male.

Time for an informal poll:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3846652#post3846652

 

[mcknia07]

"Nerdy" men tend to need more help with seeking women. They appear to be more shy as well, from what I've noticed atleast.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Because women are more complicated than men.

 

[gentryliving]

Because women are more complicated than men.

I totally agree! But i am not saying that i hate women. In fact i love to talk about women.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

There is the internet flirt factor. Online many men will glom onto any person professing themselves to be female and practically harass them with various forms of "flirtation". I've known a number of females that specifically avoid identifying themselves as such online because of this. I've become rather self conscious about this wondering if the females I interact with are thinking I am just trying to chat them up.

Also, for the relationship forum in particular, men tend to be more interested in "going after" women while women seem to be more interested in trying to get the men coming after them to go away.

 

[20Tauri]

Because women are more complicated than men.

That's kind of sexist, don't you think? I don't like the idea that women are somehow more complex or difficult to deal with simply by virtue of our femaleness.

 

[zoobyshoe]

That's kind of sexist, don't you think? I don't like the idea that women are somehow more complex or difficult to deal with simply by virtue of our femaleness.

Are you maintaining men are just as complex, or that women are simpler than men perceive them to be?

 

[20Tauri]

Are you maintaining men are just as complex, or that women are simpler than men perceive them to be?

I'm maintaining that you can't make generalizations about how simple or complex any person is based simply on biological sex.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I'm maintaining that you can't make generalizations about how simple or complex any person is based simply on biological sex.

So you object to the joke because you think it will create a false expectation in men's minds that individual women they encounter will be more complex than they might actually end up being?

 

[20Tauri]

No, I object to the joke because it's making a sweeping and unwarranted generalization about women. We are not some kind of colossal enigma left as a puzzle for men, we're just people. I know some men find women difficult to understand, but I also know some women find men confusing.

 

[zoobyshoe]

No, I object to the joke because it's making a sweeping and unwarranted generalization about women. We are not some kind of colossal enigma left as a puzzle for men, we're just people. I know some men find women difficult to understand, but I also know some women find men confusing.

Do you find the title and premise of the book Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus sexist?

 

[20Tauri]

I don't know what to tell you, as I haven't read the book and don't really have an opinion on it. There may or may not be biological differences between men and women, but I don't think it's reasonable to assume "complexity" is one of them.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't know what to tell you, as I haven't read the book and don't really have an opinion on it. There may or may not be biological differences between men and women, but I don't think it's reasonable to assume "complexity" is one of them.

There is no question about the fact there are biological differences between men and women. That book goes beyond that and maintains there are intrinsic psychological differences, that men and women simply don't think the same way in many important areas. This, according to the book, leads to confusion and mutual misunderstanding, which the author seeks to clear up.

A person could condemn it based on the fact it makes sweeping generalizations about the two sexes. It would be no problem to take any assertion he makes about one sex or the other and find a large number of individuals who don't fit his assertion. Someone could proceed from there to label the book "sexist". To do that, though, would be to take consideration of the book in a completely wrong direction. I was hoping you'd read it and would have something to say about its being sexist or not because then I'd understand more about your attitude.

 

[D H]

That's kind of sexist, don't you think? I don't like the idea that women are somehow more complex or difficult to deal with simply by virtue of our femaleness.

Touchy, touchy, touchy!

Look at the image again without that touchiness and ask yourself which gender is being defamed. I asked my wife as a sanity check. Her opinion: (1) It's funny. (2) She doesn't give a hoot if men perceive women as overly complex. (3) It doesn't demean women. It demeans men.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Touchy, touchy, touchy!

Look at the image again without that touchiness and ask yourself which gender is being defamed. I asked my wife as a sanity check. Her opinion: (1) It's funny. (2) She doesn't give a hoot if men perceive women as overly complex. (3) It doesn't demean women. It demeans men.

I was working up to this, DH.

The beauty of the joke picture is that it is perfectly symmetrical. Women can see it as poking fun at men and visa versa. I know a lot of women who would chuckle at it and say "That's sooo true!, men are clueless!"

The problem is that Jimmy presented it here in this thread as representing the male perspective with his caption "Because women are more complicated." The picture, by itself, actually functions as a rorshach test.

 

[20Tauri]

I never said it demeans anyone, I said that it was sexist. This sentence comes from the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on sexism:

"Sexism involves hatred of, or prejudice towards, a gender as a whole or the application of gender stereotypes."

(emphasis added).

What I specifically object to is the stereotype that women are complicated and men are simple. There is a pervasive attitude that women are mysterious and difficult to understand. If I picked a race and said that people of that race were more complex than others, I would be a horrible racist. Even if I meant it as some kind of backhanded compliment, it would not be an okay thing to say. I think a similar principle applies here. If you don't agree with me, well, fine--nothing I can say will convince you. I can't pretend to speak for all women, but I personally don't appreciate being regarded as some kind of strange and mysterious being whose secrets need to be unlocked.

I don't really feel like arguing about this, so I probably won't come back to this thread, but if you all want to debate it further, by all means continue without me.

 

[zoobyshoe]

If I picked a race and said that people of that race were more complex than others, I would be a horrible racist.

If someone lead you to believe this was true they've been indoctrinating you into a very bad version of Political Correctness. That particular observation should not be construed as racist. It's a neutral fact that some peoples are more complex than others. The Chinese are more socially complex than Americans, for example. So are the Japanese, for that matter. Asians are over-represented in academic excellence. Jews are over-represented among professional musicians and in the film industry. There's a difference between saying a race is categorically bad as a race, and merely saying that race is different than your own race. If you take political correctness too far a person won't be able to assert that Chinese people mostly speak Chinese without having said something criminal.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I asked my wife as a sanity check. Her opinion: (1) It's funny. (2) She doesn't give a hoot if men perceive women as overly complex. (3) It doesn't demean women. It demeans men.

I tried posting it on my Facebook, without comment, to see what would happen. Three girls "liked" it. No guys responded.

 

[dcpo]

If someone lead you to believe this was true they've been indoctrinating you into a very bad version of Political Correctness. That particular observation should not be construed as racist. It's a neutral fact that some peoples are more complex than others. The Chinese are more socially complex than Americans, for example. So are the Japanese, for that matter. Asians are over-represented in academic excellence. Jews are over-represented among professional musicians and in the film industry. There's a difference between saying a race is categorically bad as a race, and merely saying that race is different than your own race. If you take political correctness too far a person won't be able to assert that Chinese people mostly speak Chinese without having said something criminal.

You are conflating race and culture here. Moreover, while there can be some truth to stereotypes, people should be careful when appealing to them in public fora, as intent is not always clear, and reinforcing stereotypes can easily play into the hands of genuine bigots.

 

[zoobyshoe]

You are conflating race and culture here.

True.

Moreover, while there can be some truth to stereotypes, people should be careful when appealing to them in public fora, as intent is not always clear, and reinforcing stereotypes can easily play into the hands of genuine bigots.

Sounds like the slope is slippery.

There's a difference between a racial stereotype and a neutral fact about a culture. One shouldn't conflate the latter with the former in a misguided effort to be PC.

I object to 20Tauri jumping on Jimmy Snyder in her ignorance of him. He's happily married to a Chinese wife, is the loving father of an autistic son, and is not a sexist. No guy demonstrating authentically misogynistic tendencies has ever lasted very long here. New people should take the forum pulse better before they start policing it, jumping on well respected, longtime members. Abusive, insulting, racist, sexist remarks are already clearly prohibited here. If you see something, push the report button. We don't need newbies showing up deciding the forum needs PC maintenance.

As DH pointed out, the joke picture actually suggests men are simpletons more than it suggests women are overly complicated. Jimmy nudged it in the other direction when he posted it, but seeing that as sexist is a gratuitously harsh interpretation. It was teasing, pure and simple:

Teasing (sfottò) is an ancient form of simple buffoonery, a form of comedy without satire's subversive edge. Teasing includes light and affectionate parody, good-humoured mockery, simple one-dimensional poking fun, benign spoofs. Teasing typically consists in a impersonation of someone monkeying around with his exterior attributes, tics, physical blemishes, voice and mannerisms, quirks, way of dressing and walking, the phrases he typically repeats. By contrast, teasing never touches on the core issue, never makes a serious criticism judging the target with irony; it never harms the target's conduct, ideology and position of power; it never undermines the perception of his morality and cultural dimension.[23][24] Sfottò directed towards a powerful individual, makes him appear more human and draws sympathy towards him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

If a person is not OK with a certain amount of teasing I think they should post elsewhere. Those who chose not to see the difference between teasing and authentic bad will/cruelty in a joke are, I suspect, either jockeying for position as top moral entrepreneur or are under the sway of such people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_entrepreneur

 

[dcpo]

I'm not accusing anyone of being sexist, and I'm not making a slippery slope argument. My point is that jokes that play on stereotypical differences between groups play directly into the hands of people with a vested interest in magnifying the apparent differences, when they are made in certain contexts.

Making a joke that can be interpreted as sexist doesn't make someone a sexist, for example, but people who are not sexist should be aware that jokes in a public space where many people will not be familiar with the joker's background can easily be misinterpreted. That's it really.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I'm not accusing anyone of being sexist, and I'm not making a slippery slope argument. My point is that jokes that play on stereotypical differences between groups play directly into the hands of people with a vested interest in magnifying the apparent differences, when they are made in certain contexts.

Making a joke that can be interpreted as sexist doesn't make someone a sexist, for example, but people who are not sexist should be aware that jokes in a public space where many people will not be familiar with the joker's background can easily be misinterpreted. That's it really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_entrepreneur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic

 

[dcpo]

Do you have anything of substance to say or shall we leave it here?

 

[zoobyshoe]

My point is that jokes that play on stereotypical differences between groups play directly into the hands of people with a vested interest in magnifying the apparent differences, when they are made in certain contexts.

Making a joke that can be interpreted as sexist doesn't make someone a sexist, for example, but people who are not sexist should be aware that jokes in a public space where many people will not be familiar with the joker's background can easily be misinterpreted. That's it really.

I thought my point was pretty clear. You are playing moral entrepreneur and trying to incite a little moral panic here: 'you have to watch what you say or you may be contributing to bigotry'. Your reward if you succeed: you get to dictate people's behavior. PF, though, suffers from an increase in general tension and bigotry is not affected.

Get a clue about teasing, banter, trash talk, etc. so you at least recognize it for what it is when you see it. Try the movie "Grand Torino". The Clint Eastwood character gives remedial lessons.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

I'm not accusing anyone of being sexist, and I'm not making a slippery slope argument. My point is that jokes that play on stereotypical differences between groups play directly into the hands of people with a vested interest in magnifying the apparent differences, when they are made in certain contexts.

Making a joke that can be interpreted as sexist doesn't make someone a sexist, for example, but people who are not sexist should be aware that jokes in a public space where many people will not be familiar with the joker's background can easily be misinterpreted. That's it really.

IMO you're being a bit uptight

 

[dcpo]

I thought my point was pretty clear. You are playing moral entrepreneur and trying to incite a little moral panic here: 'you have to watch what you say or you may be contributing to bigotry'. Your reward if you succeed: you get to dictate people's behavior. PF, though, suffers from an increase in general tension and bigotry is not affected.

Get a clue about teasing, banter, trash talk, etc. so you at least recognize it for what it is when you see it. Try the movie "Grand Torino". The Clint Eastwood character gives remedial lessons.

Gran Torino, really? Clearly I have locked horns with a master debater and must retreat before I'm further embarrassed.